Advertisement

Varmus votes - how will you?

Tomorrow is Super Tuesday, so who are you going to vote for? Yesterday, Harold Varmus, president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, told Wired that he linkurl:plans to cast his ballot;http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/harold-varmus-e.html for Senator Barack Obama on Tuesday, February 5. Obama represents "a new kind of leader, one without ties to a divisive past and one who portrays through his personal history a global perspective that is both crucial and unprec

By | February 4, 2008

Tomorrow is Super Tuesday, so who are you going to vote for? Yesterday, Harold Varmus, president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, told Wired that he linkurl:plans to cast his ballot;http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/harold-varmus-e.html for Senator Barack Obama on Tuesday, February 5. Obama represents "a new kind of leader, one without ties to a divisive past and one who portrays through his personal history a global perspective that is both crucial and unprecedented," linkurl:Varmus;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/23543/ said in a statement. Publications and Web sites are scrambling to tell scientists linkurl:how their candidates and representatives are weighing in;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54178/ on science; now we want to know what you think. Who are you going to vote for, and why? Click linkurl:here;http://www.the-scientist.com/forum/addcomment/54278/ to tell us. (An interesting aside: Varmus endorsed Obama even though he directed the NIH under Clinton's husband, and as a New York senator, she is his representative in Washington. He said he admires her "understanding of the relationship between science and the federal government," and would vote for her if she became the Democratic candidate.)
Advertisement

Comments

Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

Why? He is a breath of freah air -- a new beginning -- he is exactly what this country needs right now.
Avatar of: Ellen Hunt

Ellen Hunt

Posts: 199

February 5, 2008

Elections for me have been composed of candidates I was appalled to need to choose between for a long time. Hilary is barely out of appalling territory, and after her debate performance in S.C. I have to wonder. Bill appalls me because of his lying and probable blackmailing of Congress to avoid impeachment. Then Bill had less grace than Richard Nixon, who at least resigned! Had Bill had the grace to resign, we would have had Gore for president and this appalling president Bush would never have happened. McCain isn't appalling, but I don't agree with his stance on Iraq because of the cost. Romney I disagree with on too many things, but I'm not appalled by him either. So this is, all around, a great election - the best in my memory. There is no way though, that I'll cast my vote for Hilary/Bill. Obama seems to be inspiring, he's a new person without much baggage, and I agree with him on the major issues.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

Because of her vast experiences and in depth confidence in what she believs and says. Would like to give a well deserving lady cnadidate an opportunity to serve our great country and the global population.
Avatar of: null null

null null

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

I voted for Hillary Clinton because I think she's smart, more analytical--speaks in fewer sound bites, and can withstand the right-wing hate machine. And because she's a woman.\nIn November, I will vote for the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is.
Avatar of: Suzanne Willis

Suzanne Willis

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

I am 100% behind Obama - I believe he has the vision and drive to lead this country out of the morass we are in.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 6

February 5, 2008

American elections are like choosing which paddle out of an assortment will be used on you. It's gonna hurt, so pick the one that hurts you the least. The American left has now become the American right of the pre-Reagen era. They have been out of power so long, it looks like they are saviors, when in reality the two parties are parodies of one another. Both want power for the sake of power and are willing to do anything to get it, including promise things that can't be funded if they found out the white house was made of solid gold and every time the toilet flushes money came out. \n\nIf a democrat wins the next election, I don't envy their position. The democratic party is split between those that just want to punish the current administration for the wrongs they have done and those who want to change things and let the past go. These actions are mutually exclusive. If you want change, forget the past. If you want to punish those from the past, all time will be taken up doing so, and no work will get done. \n\nOf course, if a republican is elected, nothing changes. \n\nWe need leaders who understand the basis that formed this country. It wasn't liberty for all, freedom, religion, or any of the platitudes spouted. This country was formed on the basis that I could do anything as long as it did not infringe on the rights or property of another. That individual voters would select candidates based on their own best interest. People should be free to succeed, but without the freedom to fail, there is no freedom to succeed. \n\nOur economic system is so full of bloat caused by subsidies, pork, &etc that nobody can quote me the actual cost of a gallon of milk. We are on the precipice of our economy failing, but not for any of the reasons the news is telling us. We are failing because the government guarantees so much to so many that soon they will begin to default on those promises. The people were not allowed to fail, so the government will. Not anarchy, but inflation, recession, stagnation. The only think keeping us afloat right now is the fact that China is holding billions of US treasury bonds and can't unload them because it would ruin both countries.\n\nWho would I vote for? Ron Paul. Not because anything would change, but because it would not get worse under him. It took years to get us to this point, and it will take years to get us back, but we have to start somewhere. He is the only person talking reality, and he is portrayed as a lunatic because he is saying unpopular things. Our petty scientific differences and needs are meaningless unless our economic system is brought back under control.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 2

February 5, 2008

He's proven he can do the job.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

For Obama - I guess the old idealist in me dies hard, but he is a candidate that I can really support. I haven't felt that way about a candidate since Jimmy Carter!
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 4

February 5, 2008

I will write in a name. I do not like Hillary or Obama. Saying you are for change means nothing. Carter was for change. Show me the money, show me HOW you are going to effect this change.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 4

February 5, 2008

I voted for Putin.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 4

February 5, 2008

Why is The Scientist posting another political story. Stick to promoting scientific papers. \n\nThis country no longer has two political parties, it has two political brands - but both are shills for the corporations. \n\n\n\n\n
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 2

February 5, 2008

Our country is steadily going down hill intellectually...our kids are behind many of their 3rd World counterparts...we need change. I believe Obama could be that change. \nWhile I like Bill...having him back at the White House is not in our best interest. The US needs something new, something fresh and something inventive that everyone can believe in. Unfortunately with Bill as her husband, I do not see anything new or fresh about the Clinton duo coming back to the White house.\nWe need to stop living in the past.\n
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

Any Democratic Candidate will be preferable over any republican candidate
Avatar of: null null

null null

Posts: 1

February 5, 2008

All democrats and McCain are bad on immigration, i.e. they want to let everybody in. Huckabee is too tied to religious fundamentalist. Romney seems relatively sensible and he's a governor which is the best training ground for a president.\n\nAlbert Himoe
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 1

February 6, 2008

I cast my vote for Hillary because she seems to have the most comprehensive policies for the advancement of life science research. She says she will "renew the nation's commitment to research; help create the premier science, engineering, technology and mathematics workforce; and upgrade our innovation infrastructure." \nShe plans to:\n "Increase the basic research budgets 50% over 10 years at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the Defense Department." \n "Increase the NIH budget by 50% over 5 years and aim to double it over 10 years." \n "Direct the federal agencies to award prizes in order to accomplish specific innovation goals." \n "Triple the number of NSF fellowships and increase the size of each award by 33 percent." \n "Overhaul the R&E [Research and Experimentation] tax credit to make the U.S. a more attractive location for high-paying jobs." (Source: Clinton's web site Innovation page) \nEmbryonic Stem Cell Research: Clinton proposes to sign an Executive Order that: "Rescinds President Bush's ban on ethical embryonic stem cell research and promotes stem cell research that complies with the highest ethical standards." (Source: Clinton's "Ending the War on Science" press release) \n\n
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 2

February 6, 2008

Voted for Huckabee. McCain does not have the temperament for president. Romney would be my second choice. Hillary is not the brightest bulb in the faculty lounge and would bankrupt our country with her European socialist approach to putting in place massive entitlements and taxing everything that has pulse and respiration to pay for them. Ditto for Obama when it comes to entitlements and taxation. Ron Paul and Huckabee want to eliminate the IRS, and this would be a good start to downsizing the government.
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 9

February 6, 2008

what a waste of space. Who cares what he thinks? Ask the rank and file, their votes count.
Avatar of: VINCENT CONNORS

VINCENT CONNORS

Posts: 3

February 6, 2008

Hillary - experience over un-detailed claims of change.
Avatar of: SAID GOUELI

SAID GOUELI

Posts: 3

February 7, 2008

He has the honesty, integrity, credibility, and vision for a man that we need desparetly to lead us and bring respect back to our beloved nation. He is the one that does not belong to the political machine and not interested in building one either as the Clintons, the Bushes, etc.\nWe need one of us who knows how hard it is to fight this political empire and the one that makes us beileve in ourselves and not to be synical.\nS A Goueli\nResearch Fellow\nClinical Assisant Professor\nUniv. Wisconsin
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 2

February 11, 2008

I will vote for Seantor Clinton. I think she has way more appropriate experience in both foreign and domestic affairs than Barack Obama, although I like both candidates.

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
NuAire
NuAire
Advertisement