Amv

Gamble?

I believe there are many things in life that require gambling, taking risk to gain ultimately. Gambling on a potential President is not one of those. Don't get me wrong, I am all about change for the better and by far not a conservative, But gambling on a potential President not only puts my future at stake but also my peers, my family, and future generations to suffer. The time for change is now, but can we believe in someone that hasn't accomplished enough? Eight years ago a potential president nominee and now currently holds office promised change, things changed but not all for the better. The United States and the world is facing so many problems at the moment, war, economic issues, unemployment, health security, global warming and civil rights issues; to depend on a single trump card to take care of all these crisis is indeed, wishful thinking.

We can say taking this gamble and risk can reap in wonders for our later generations, so they don't have to suffer as we did, or can have a brighter future than we had, But can we live knowing we gambled on something so precious? I can not, and will not gamble on a X factor.
Also, the author suggest that "America..Now IS Broke" To believe that America is Broke and still suggest Gambling on a President, The highest authority of our Government, is the same as suggesting we play Russian Roulette and hope we don't get the bullet.

Instead, I suggest voting on facts and credentials, not words and personality. Its okay to believe in change, and to believe we have hope but believe those that have done more than talk.

Gambling on Obama

Why John Edwards Couldn't Win.

The Edwards Campaign: What went wrong?

During a time like Super Tuesday, it seems that everyone is caught up with trying to find out who's in the lead. As for me I've decide to take this time to figure out why John Edwards didn't lead and dominate this presidential campaign. There are times in history that the better candidate didn't win because of miscommunication with the common citizen.

The article above analyzes various points of views on why a candidate with good intentions, bullet proof credentials could still fail. The author suggest that John Edwards had a good intention but promoted the middle class as a "losing side" and special interest groups as "winning side" bringing upon a divide as though it is as clear as day. Which might be true, but the common man or woman doesn't want to believe that they are on a losing side if any side at all.

I believe this article is important to our society because we often glorify the victors so much that we forget those that contributed just as hard or at times more than those that succeeded.