Obama or McCain?
Something I wrote to a friend who is supporting Obama-- worth reproducing here...
As for Obama, I don't think things would change much with him either. He's more talker than doer-- and we already know that the Dem Congress is as well. In a (significant) sense, that would be wonderful-- because people's idolatry toward politics would be further weakened.
As for McCain, again I'm no fan. He would be very Bush-like in some bad ways on some things (e.g., foreign policy). He would be different and a mixed bag on other things-- some better, some worse. But he was the only GOP primary candidate who was/is noticeably different than Bush and could credibly talk about change (for better and for worse).
Republicans are in a weird position if they look long-term. They might believe that an Obama presidency would be disastrous. But it's also likely that an Obama presidency would be far milder than they fear-- and that as Bill Clinton did in 1992-1994, Obama and a Dem Congress could lead to a GOP takeover of Congress in 2010. (GOP gains in Congress are highly unlikely under McCain-- not enough momentum and increased GOP complacency on matters like fiscal conservatism and foreign policy.)
posted by Eric Schansberg @ 8:48 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
I thought I would post the comments (expanded a bit) that prompted what Eric posted here:
My support for Baron is simply because he's a Democrat; I'm voting Democratic across the board. Call me a yellow-dog Democrat. (Odd, since Baron is a "Blue Dog" Democrat.)
I had reservations about Obama earlier this year, but I am now convinced he has the intelligence and force of will to be an effective president. I want him to be president along with a Democratic Congress, so he can get more accomplished. And it's imperative to me that McCain/Palin not be elected. McCain's choice of Palin represents his decision to run towards the religious/cultural conservative base of his party--which alienates me since I'm now very liberal on issues such as same-sex marriage—I'm on the other side of the cultural divide that the Republicans want to exploit. (Palin actually used the code word "San Francisco" in her acceptance speech, something that made me quite angry.) I am also concerned about McCain's age and temperament. I am convinced that if McCain were elected, nothing would change in this country: It will be more incompetence and more Karl Rove.
One more comment: I won't be voting for Obama because people's idolatry toward politics would be further weakened. I'll be voting for Obama because I think he would be good for this country. Or put another way: over the last eight years, we've had quite enough weakening of people's idolatry towards government!
OK, we can reproduce the comments here if you'd like.
Here's what I wrote in reply to the first two paragraphs-- and then William responded in his last paragraph to what is written below...
-------------------
You're usually much more thought-full when it comes to things, so I would have never guessed you to be a yellow anything in politics. I won't tell anyone, since it reflects poorly on you! ;-)
As for Obama, I don't think things would change much with him either. He's more talker than doer-- and we already know that the Dem Congress is as well. In a (significant) sense, that would be wonderful-- because people's idolatry toward politics would be further weakened.
As for McCain, again I'm no fan. He would be very Bush-like in some bad ways on some things (e.g., foreign policy). He would be different and a mixed bag on other things-- some better, some worse. But he was the only GOP primary candidate who was/is noticeably different than Bush and could credibly talk about change (for better and for worse).
Republicans are in a weird position if they look long-term. They might believe that an Obama presidency would be disastrous. But it's also likely that an Obama presidency would be far milder than they fear-- and that as Bill Clinton did in 1992-1994, Obama and a Dem Congress could lead to a GOP takeover of Congress in 2010. (GOP gains in Congress are highly unlikely under McCain-- not enough momentum and increased GOP complacency on matters like fiscal conservatism and foreign policy.)
You said:
I won't be voting for Obama because people's idolatry toward politics would be further weakened. I'll be voting for Obama because I think he would be good for this country.
My response: I realize that. I'm predicting that this will be an unintended consequence of his election if he wins. Many people believe he will be "good for the country"-- in ways that range from modest to messianic. I think all except the most tepid versions of the former are bound to be disappointed.
You said:
Or put another way: over the last eight years, we've had quite enough weakening of people's idolatry towards government!
My reply:
I think (and hope!) that you mean something other than encouraging idolatry.
What I meant was: people's idolatry towards government has been weakened for the last eight years because government (at the federal level) has been such a disaster. So the point of my quip was that I hoped that government wouldn't be so disastrous in the next administration.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home