« Colbert in Marvel Comics & at The New Yorker Festival
McCain, Obama Campaigns Now Moving Into Full Attack Mode »



Off the Fence: Voting Obama

October 6th, 2008
By PETE ABEL, Managing Editor

Print Print

“The great thing about democracy is that it gives every voter a chance to do something stupid.” - Art Spander

———————–

Maybe this is my “chance to do something stupid.” Or maybe it’s the smartest decision I’ve ever made. I don’t know. Time will tell. Regardless, the decision has been made.

I first voted for a Democrat for U.S. Senator in November 2006. I now plan to cast my first vote for a Democrat for President next month.

Granted, my road to supporting Sen. Obama has been an on-again, off-again journey — largely because, like Joe Gandelman, I’ve long-respected Sen. McCain, especially the Sen. McCain of 2000. This year, I kept hoping he would defy gravity, which he did for awhile, but no longer. I still agree with much of what McCain stands for and advocates, but he has progressively lost my vote in the last several weeks, for a number of reasons; in particular, what seems to be a worsening case of “bipolarity.”

As George Will wrote Sept. 23: “Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.” Will’s indictment even made McCain-backer James Joyner flinch.

Thursday, Steven Stark summed it up thus: “… in the past several weeks McCain has certainly been anything but steady at the helm. The economy is good — oops, no it isn’t. I’m for the Paulson plan — no, maybe I’m not. I won’t be going to the debates unless there’s a bailout deal — oh, I guess I’ll go.”

I also count among these signs of bipolarity, McCain’s non-vetting of Palin. Qualified or not — and I continue to believe that, even after her less-than-disastrous debate performance, she is woefully not — picking her was yet another in a series of snap, half-thought decisions.

I also factor into the mix certain less-substantial but still bothersome points. For instance: McCain’s endless claims that Obama refuses to acknowledge the progress wrought by the troop surge in Iraq, despite Obama’s repeated recognition of said progress. Case in point: In the Sept. 26 debate, McCain said Obama didn’t acknowledge the progress. Obama then acknowledged the progress. Later, McCain said Obama wouldn’t acknowledge the progress. OK … ?

Bottom line: I fear McCain’s mind is at once too stubborn and too flippant to be trusted in the White House. His mind might be useful for a fighter pilot, or for a Senator who has built a noteworthy career on squeaky-wheelness — but it’s not a useful mind for a President. At his core, I still think McCain is a decent person, probably more decent than I’ll ever be. But I can’t vote for him, not for the top elected office in the land.

Which brings me to Sen. Obama.

Now, before the hard-right and right-leaning factions who read this post prepare their tar-and-feather mix with my name on it, let me be painfully clear: I do have some serious concerns about Sen. Obama. First on the list, I think many of his policies tend to the super-sizing of government, which is almost always accompanied by profligate, wasteful spending and heavy-handed taxation. Second, despite promising (as McCain did) a campaign of decency, Obama has detoured from that promise, more than once (as McCain has).

Regardless, these doubts pale in comparison to what I consider the Senator’s most-redeeming qualities; namely, his tendency to take a thoughtful, cautious, and diplomatic approach to virtually every subject. And I am certainly not alone in reaching this conclusion. Consider:

Nine-term Republican Congressman Wayne Gilchrest applauds Obama’s “initiative and reason and prudence and wisdom.”

Clive Crook writes: “I do think Obama is handling the [financial] crisis much better than McCain — not because he is suggesting better remedies (he continues to say little), but because his instinct to reflect before opening his mouth and his impeccable taste in advisers are both working to his advantage.”

Joe Klein reports: “… I’ve also gotten the sense, in the times I’ve interviewed and chatted with him, that calm is Obama’s natural default position. He is friendly, informal, accessible … and a mystery, hard to get to know. He doesn’t give away much, doesn’t — unlike Bill Clinton — have that desperate need to make you like him. His brilliant, at times excessive, oratory is an outlier — the only over-the-top, Technicolor quality he has.”

Even the seemingly-Obama-skeptical John Fortier gives the Senator’s measured demeanor hesitant props: “Both [candidates] claim bipartisanship, but McCain’s idea of it is more muscular. He noisily crosses the aisle and forges coalitions, often without the support of Senate leaders, such as his efforts on campaign finance reform or with the Gang of 14 on judicial nominations. Obama is gentler and pragmatic; he reaches out to Republicans but tends to have the backing of his own party leadership.” (Some may view this prudence as less-than-ideal, but I don’t think it’s inherently wrong to delay stepping out on a limb until you’ve made sure your friends — or most of them, at least — are still your friends.)

I also continue to believe that, despite our serious economic troubles, foreign policy should be the defining issue of this election. And Obama’s emphasis on calm, caution, and alignment seems to fit perfectly with the type of foreign-policy approach I think we need in the years ahead, an approach described thus by Richard Haas, at the end of his essay in the May/June 2008 edition of Foreign Affairs:

There will be a premium on consultation and coalition building and on a diplomacy that encourages cooperation when possible and shields such cooperation from the fallout of inevitable disagreements. The United States will no longer have the luxury of a “You’re either with us or against us” foreign policy.

With this confession of my voting intent, I am painfully aware that certain members of my family and circle of friends will be angry with me, for one or two reasons or more, including these:

(1) They think McCain is the more pro-military candidate, and we have a cherished member of our family in the military. In response, I’d respectfully encourage them to check the facts.

(2) Obama is pro-choice. To this, I can only say that there are issues more important than abortion in this election, and I continue to believe the best deterrent to abortion is education, not government intervention.

Bottom line: Even if I question some of Obama’s policies, even if my vote helps turn over the White House and both chambers of Congress to a political party with which I frequently disagree, I still want a President who is studied and cautious and diplomatic — and of the candidates most likely to be President on Nov. 5, I find Sen. Obama to be the more-studied and cautious and diplomatic of the two. Period.



This entry was posted on Monday, October 6th, 2008 at 9:23 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections, Politics. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Viewing 30 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    With all due respect, Pete, I don't see how someone who felt strongly about working within the GOP for reform just a short time ago but now supports one party rule by the Democrats can do so on the basis of the GOP candidate being too erratic.

    The difference in the two candidates is more a product of the environment that they each have to work in rather than temperament. It's very easy to be cool and above the fray when you're never going to face any criticism for any move you make, as opposed to the guy who is wrong no matter what he does. Your looking at one person who has the wind at his back and the other who's fighting gale force winds and complaining that there's something wrong with the guy who can't navigate the storm.
    • ^
    • v
    Country first, CStanley. Pete has made a good choice for a steadier candidate for President. The GOP can be reformed over the next few years, but not with McCain in the Oval Office.

    It's very easy to be cool and above the fray when you're never going to face any criticism for any move you make, as opposed to the guy who is wrong no matter what he does

    This is a very silly statement made by someone who either does not remember the primaries or who is pretending that he doesn't.
    • ^
    • v
    The GOP will not be reformed in time to keep the corruption of the Democratic party in check, MaryL, if we don't maintain divided rule. We need it now more than ever since we can't afford the payola schemes that have dominated Washington politics and led to the economic meltdown.

    This is a very silly statement made by someone who either does not remember the primaries or who is pretending that he doesn't.
    When was Obama ever really challenged by the media? Can you show me one hard hitting article or interview?
    • ^
    • v
    CStanley,
    The wind hasn't ALWAYS been at Obama's back. in the later months of the primary Obama withered a bit and could have collapsed under the pressure. Despite the urgings of the blogosphere Obama forged ahead with his plan - slow and steady. The experience has strengthened Obama.

    McCain made a strategic decision to declare war on the press and go the full Rove. He felt he wasn't gaining any traction being the 2000 version of himself so he re-made himself as an angry culture warrior. Yes, the press turned on him viciously - and in some cases (NYT with the Iseman story) preceded McCain's negative turn. But by and large McCain still had a well of sympathy in the press until late July. When he turned the press into the enemy McCain had to rely on his alternative media. But he never had the discipline to carry it out.
    • ^
    • v
    That's pretty accurate elrod, but proves my point. As soon as the general election got underway, Obama got a boost from the negative press that started affecting McCain. Obama also started right out of the gate by reversing his pledge on public finance but took little heat for it, then started twisting McCain's words about "100 years in Iraq." Then as soon as McCain countered with anything negative, he's accused of Rovian tactics.

    How many times has Obama now said that the gloves are coming off (I think it was Jake Tapper who dubbed him the "Isotoner candidate"?) yet his negativity is always portrayed as a response to McCain, as though he's just doing what he has to do. When McCain goes negative though it's a character flaw, and people like Joe G. immediately talk about how this turns off independent voters and that there will be backlash. The double standard is beyond ridiculous.
    • ^
    • v
    Yep, Country first. Vote for the diplomat this time. The world is watching..

    No Cowboys, No Mavericks, Just Sanity.
    *******
    "Thursday, Steven Stark summed it up thus: “… in the past several weeks McCain has certainly been anything but steady at the helm. The economy is good — oops, no it isn’t. I’m for the Paulson plan — no, maybe I’m not. I won’t be going to the debates unless there’s a bailout deal — oh, I guess I’ll go.”
    *********

    The Obama campaign would do well to purchase or redub that bit The Daily Show did on McCain's flip-flopping within the same interview about the Paulson Bill. If he could add Smeagle at the end and that photo comparison with McCain...my God...the resemblance is too close! ...lol... What a riot that show is..

    It is good to remember that McCain is sequestered in la-la land when it comes to the real suffering of the American people. He totally was disconnected and didn't even realize we were in a recession, then he did, then he didn't, then he did...

    Then when he got caught on his apathetic incompetance and it bit him in the butt, he ran from the debate like a chicken...only coming back when he realized his campaign would end right there and then if he didn't; and had the gall to call his cowardice as doing something heroic, when Congress publicly dis-invited him on the evening news and told him flatly to stay out of it..

    Why do I smell Dick Cheney behind McCain. I can almost see Cheney's face being superimposed on McCain's now and then. Must just be the terrible color quality on Fox news?

    Fearful now that his Talking Caribou Barbie Doll has not pulled his blunder far enough ahead in the polls, he returns to more cowardice in the form of swiftboating and namecalling. If McCain was on a playground at school, he'd be put in a corner with a dunce cap by now..

    While we are revisiting the youthful indescretion of the candidates..

    Even nowadays, Ittle Johnny McCain needs to grow up, but not on our dollar. He's too erratic and immature. He is, like Bush, the son of privilege and was spared facing the brunt of his mistakes while daddy bailed him out right and left in his youth. I watched that documentary on his life and marvelled how close his upbringing was to Dubya's. Both of them had father's of high position and privilege. Both did very poorly in school...McCain barely graduating (if memory serves) at the very bottom 5% of his class. Both "partied" quite heavily and were irresponsible. Now McCain wants us to trust him to run the country?

    The "relatability quotient" falls flat when you consider that most "Joe Sixpacks" (do they take offense to being called this?) would never run for president and would shudder in horror at the idea of really considering any of their friends as running our country. I mean, it's fun to jaw about down at the pool hall, but does McCain seriously believe that behaving like an erratic jackass will appeal to these people in these sobering times?

    Even "Joe Sixpack" has to pay the bills with some sort of income. Heck, I consider myself educated a bit above the average Joe or Jane and still, I would not want me running the country. Relatability is overrated when people are frantic and looking to a solid, sober and sane leader to get them through these troubled times and back to the easy days at the beer hall after work. Even Joe has a bottom line and this time around Joe's wallet is going to vote.

    Work...remember when America had work?
    • ^
    • v
    That's pretty accurate elrod, but proves my point. As soon as the general election got underway, Obama got a boost from the negative press that started affecting McCain.

    I don't necessarily agree that McCain is being destroyed by the press, but if he is, it's a situation of his own making. He's cut off access to himself and his virtually unknown running-mate. Plus, he's made it clear that everybody but Fox News and rightwing radio is the enemy. How smart is that?
    • ^
    • v
    In his column that appeared in my local paper today, George Will damns McCain with very faint praise. But what is really, I believe, the best comment of all is Todays (10-6) Non Sequitur cartoon. In it you have a couple standing outside a republician party hq-no parties were mentioned, but the inference is clear-In the window is a sign that says Incumbent party HQ, another sign below this says. YOU WANT CHANGE? VOTE FOR US!. The man says to his wife"Well this answers our question on just how stupid they think we are". The very best political commentary in the entire country. Non Sequitur by Wiley.