Are Democrats more concerned with facade then substance?
Hillary for her last name Obama for his voice and "charisma" Edwards for his looks Yet the two candidates with the most experience, best legislative and ethical records and have actual platform's with actual plans of action are hardly noticed.
Joe Biden is by far the best DNC candidate if based on substance and qaulifications
john_stolworthy2007-07-20T15:32:53Z
Favorite Answer
Both parties do it.
Gulianni was in the right place at the right time. If he had been mayor of Pahrump, NV on 9/11, nobody would even know his name. We all know how Republicans like to raise the 9/11 demons whenever possible...
Hillary is best known for her last name. Whether this is a good or bad thing has yet to be determined.
Obama reminds a lot of people of Jack Kennedy. Kennedy he is not...
Edwards is best known for playing 2nd fiddle to Kerry in '04. He actually has substance and a few good ideas if one can see beyond the "pretty-boy" facade.
I liked McCain in 2000, but since then he has sacrificed his integrity and become a parrot for his masters.
My favorite right now is Paul (yes, a Republican). He has been a senator for 10 years, has never voted to raise taxes, has never voted for an unbalanced budget, and voted against the Iraq war (something no other candidate can claim).
I like Biden, too, but he lacks the fund raising potential to be more than a spoiler.
In all objectivity, I think almost every politician cares for the facade. Consider the Republican Taliban, which featured the likes of Ready Rick Santorum, who camped out at Terri Shiavo's bedside, all the while espousing the death penalty, a bogus "war" in Iraq, etc. Or Mark Foley, whose predilection for male interns while espousing the need for tougher predatory laws was certainly an interesting juxtaposition...
That goes for Republicans as well as Democrats. Remember, the Republicans are all atwitter over the guy from Law and Order, or whatever it is, then there is always Rudy "9/11" Giuliani.