Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Pesky Ballot

My absentee ballot is sitting on my desk next to my computer, and I can’t get myself to fill in the presidential box. McCain’s campaign has been a mess, and his recent jump from policy to policy during this economic crisis has not helped in making him appear capable to lead. Having Palin on the ticket sure doesn’t help either.

I have been pretty clear as to why I have serious doubts about an Obama presidency and what it means for America and the world. I don’t think his past associations with people like Ayers and Wright are trivial campaign issues, and I don’t trust the wing of the Democratic Party that pushed him through the primary and the main campaign.

While Jesse Jackson and Obama are hardly peas in a pod, this sure doesn’t help in casting my vote for the Democrat this season:
Jackson believes that, although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

Jackson warns that he isn't an Obama confidant or adviser, "just a supporter." But he adds that Obama has been "a neighbor or, better still, a member of the family." Jackson's son has been a close friend of Obama for years, and Jackson's daughter went to school with Obama's wife Michelle.”

So my ballot will likely sit there, glaring at me...and hey, if Hitch can begrudgingly vote for Obama, maybe I won’t regret it like I fear I will.

Update:
Idiot extraordinaire, Sean Hannity, continues to scratch the bottom of the barrel when it comes to finding people who will criticize Obama. Hannity is a reluctant McCain supporter, but watching him moan as his precious Republican Party loses wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Update 2:
Bob has a rundown of who is supporting who. Kellie links to the “Americans for Bosnia” who have endorsed Obama, and who bring up a reservation TNC has elaborated on previously. They wrote:
“It is true that, as far as the issues relevant to this blog, Obama is far from being the perfect candidate. I believe his opposition to the Iraq war, while principled, was based more on a narrow critique of the Bush Administration's admittedly clumsy preparations and rhetoric rather than a broader examination of the issue…. His record does not suggest that he naturally leans towards the cause of liberal intervention. Indeed, earlier in his candidacy I was very much afraid that an Obama administration would be in many ways a return to the craven equivocation of Jimmy Carter."

11 comments:

Daniel Stark said...

Do whatever you think is right. I'm personally going to stick with McCain (who I've been with since Fall of 2007).

E.D. Kain said...

I feel the same way, Roland. It's a mess, this whole thing. Then again, I'm not too worried about the nonsense of Jesse Jackson who once said he'd like to cut Obama's nuts off...

The notion that the "Zionist lobby" somehow controls America is silly, and any actual politician to reach the White House will realize this. Obama is no Jackson. I think he's a serious and thoughtful person.

In the end, I think Obama's will be a very Clintonesque Presidency.

TNC said...

Took a look at the Hitch piece in slate. It seems he's more troubled by the Palin pick than anything. Given his absolute atheism, this is not surprising.

I agree the McCain campaign has been screwing up but that will not make me vote for Obama. I really do not want to relive the Carter years and all indications point towards an Obama presidency as quite similar to Carter's, on both the domestic and international fronts.

Perhaps even more disconcerting, if McCain loses, this will convince the social conservatives that the Repub. party lost because they were not conservative enough i.e. that McCain failed to rally "the base." The party will not choose another hawkish centrist for quite some time.

Anonymous said...

if you would turn on mccain so easily, then you really should have never been allowed to vote in the republican primary to begin with

Roland Dodds said...

I have not seen tonight’s debate yet, but I don’t personally believe McCain can turn this around at this point. More importantly, I am a California voter, and there is no way that it’s going to McCain. My vote is rather meaningless in a state like that (whether for or against Obama).

But I do fear that the Repubs will run to their protectionist and religious right after they lose. They will say that they gave the moderates a chance with McCain and he lost it for them. If that becomes the case, and the Democrats remain beholden to their foolish and naive activists on the moveon.org left, I will be out in the cold without a party.

I don’t like Obama. I think he represents how pathetic politics can be in the United States: Lots of fluff and image. He obviously won’t be able to run the country that way, so I suppose I will have to wait and see what kind of leader he makes. And the Obama folks who believe that since he ran a successful campaign, he has experience akin to running the most powerful nation in the world, well...there’s a sucker born ever minute I guess.

E.D. Kain said...

tnc--

I think the fact that McCain picked Palin and that still didn't win the election for them (it rallied the base, but was still not successful) will prove that a social con is not the way to go. They may, as you say, try again with a more social conservative, but I think that will be a losing ticket. I think conservatives will have to start asking serious questions about what it means to be a conservative in modern times.

Will they follow socially conservative populism, or will they once again become the party of fiscal responsibility, strong defense, and practical, individualist politics?

The latter is the sort of conservative I am. I think a few solid defeats will force conservatives to evolve. Maybe not, maybe that's just wishful thinking...

TNC said...

E.D. Cain writes:

"The notion that the "Zionist lobby" somehow controls America is silly, and any actual politician to reach the White House will realize this."

If only this were the case. Mearshimer and Walt have received loads of accolades for their Israel Lobby book and Obama seems to take a very similar "realist" perspective on international relations. Look at the foreign policy experts he surrounds himself with.

Roland writes:

"They will say that they gave the moderates a chance with McCain and he lost it for them. If that becomes the case, and the Democrats remain beholden to their foolish and naive activists on the moveon.org left, I will be out in the cold without a party."

Bingo. That's exactly the position I see developing.

bob said...

I agree with EDKain rather than Roland and TNC on this: social conservatives might claim that McCain lost because he didn't rally the base, but the claim will be rather empty, given the way Palin has rallied said base.

More sensible Republican strategists will see that Obama won not by mobilising the moveon nutjobs, but by reaching out to non-partisan voters and appealing to the centre, in a way that McCain seemed able to at first but has failed to sustain (partly because of the Palin effect).

(Compare Britain: only after Blair demonstrated the success of appealing to the centre ground, and brought the Labour Party back into the political mainstream, did the moderates around David Cameron take over from the hard right base in the Conservative Party.)

Personally, I see Obama reliving Clinton more than reliving Carter, for what that's worth.

Talking of Carter, though, he almost disproves this claim of ED's:
"The notion that the "Zionist lobby" somehow controls America is silly, and any actual politician to reach the White House will realize this.

Roland Dodds said...

“Social conservatives might claim that McCain lost because he didn't rally the base, but the claim will be rather empty, given the way Palin has rallied said base.”

I think you are right Bob, but it won’t stop conservatives from arguing that they would have preformed better with a clearer conservative message. And I think that will resonate with Republican voters, and they will likely argue that folks like myself who helped push McCain through the primary were just Democrats trying to destroy the holy Republican Party.

Not that I care what happens to the Repubs. If its core constituency wants Palin type leaders, then they should have them. Perhaps we will see centrist Democrats and Republicans align outside of either party; I recognize that that is likely a pipe dream however.

My most recent post linking to the talk with the authors of “After Bush” also don’t believe Obama will be a repeat of the Carter administration, and that he will quickly offend his lefty idealist backers. Perhaps. I lean towards believing he won’t be Carter 2, but it isn’t based on a great deal of evidence, and so that makes my decision difficult.

Since all the debates have been had, and no real change in policy or temperament are likely to occur, I figure I had best fill out of the rest of my ballot and send it off tomorrow, or I’m just going to sit around thinking about past November 5th.

TNC said...

"I think you are right Bob, but it won’t stop conservatives from arguing that they would have preformed better with a clearer conservative message. And I think that will resonate with Republican voters, and they will likely argue that folks like myself who helped push McCain through the primary were just Democrats trying to destroy the holy Republican Party."

Absolutely. Look at anon's comment above.

E.D. Kain (sorry for the typo, my grandma's maiden name was Cain) writes:

"Will they follow socially conservative populism, or will they once again become the party of fiscal responsibility, strong defense, and practical, individualist politics?"

Like you, I hope for the latter. But I think this is wishful thinking on our part.

Bob, Obama won the Democratic primary by appealing to the left wing of the party. After that, he started tacking toward the center.

McCain won the primary by presenting himself as a maverick and appealing to the center. After that, he realized he needed to appeal to social conservatives to win the election.

As you know, whoever brings the most voters to the polls will win the election. If a Republican candidate fails to appeal to the social conservatives they will not vote for the candidate and the Republican will lose. Unfortunately, the social conservatives are the majority in the Republican party today, especially in the solid red states. Without their support, Republican presidential candidates do not have a chance.

Like Roland, I wish it were different. I would have liked to see a McCain-Liberman ticket. But again, more wishful thinking on my part...

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Yeah. I can feel good for a change because of not having to make that choice. Not that this feeling is helping anyone or being positive in any way, I fully realize.

Off topic: I realized after that post on Roland the Rancid that by an unfortunate accident his first name is... you know. I hope you easily found out which Roland is meant in the comments ;-)