01-06-2008, 08:29 PM
I was not criticizing your choice of linkaged, PeterB, just pointing out that -- after 7+ years of faith-based government -- people are very interested in the science and technology policies of the candidates.
There are also a couple of reviews of the candidates policies on space exploration here and here.
The Republican party has been so thoroughly colonized by the forces of ignorance and superstition that there is no viable choice on that side. Giuliani is probably the most enlightened candidate, but he is keeping quiet about science policy for fear of censure from the "I ain't descended from no monkey" constituency.
On the Democratic side, Senator Obama is the most problematic, but it mostly seems like nobody in his campaign thought to prepare any Science and Technology talking points for him. Offsetting his science education plan by de-funding NASA, though, is fairly dumb-assed and cowardly. Going after NASA to appear fiscally conservative has the stink of a focus-group.
If you go down the "Science Education" column in the Popular Mechanics "Geek the Vote" matrix Clinton and Edwards are the only ones making concrete policy statements, and Edwards edges out Clinton by having a somewhat broader vision (although they coincide on most points).
Edwards gets my (tentative) support because he appears to be the only candidate who is making Science and Technology policies part of his standard campaign recitation.
There are also a couple of reviews of the candidates policies on space exploration here and here.
The Republican party has been so thoroughly colonized by the forces of ignorance and superstition that there is no viable choice on that side. Giuliani is probably the most enlightened candidate, but he is keeping quiet about science policy for fear of censure from the "I ain't descended from no monkey" constituency.
On the Democratic side, Senator Obama is the most problematic, but it mostly seems like nobody in his campaign thought to prepare any Science and Technology talking points for him. Offsetting his science education plan by de-funding NASA, though, is fairly dumb-assed and cowardly. Going after NASA to appear fiscally conservative has the stink of a focus-group.
If you go down the "Science Education" column in the Popular Mechanics "Geek the Vote" matrix Clinton and Edwards are the only ones making concrete policy statements, and Edwards edges out Clinton by having a somewhat broader vision (although they coincide on most points).
Edwards gets my (tentative) support because he appears to be the only candidate who is making Science and Technology policies part of his standard campaign recitation.