03 November, 2008
Repeated, For Emphasis (Part 1)
The Economist's Endorsement of Barack Obama for President.
For all the shortcomings of the campaign, both John McCain and Barack Obama offer hope of national redemption. Now America has to choose between them. The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence. But we acknowledge it is a gamble. Given Mr Obama’s inexperience, the lack of clarity about some of his beliefs and the prospect of a stridently Democratic Congress, voting for him is a risk. Yet it is one America should take, given the steep road ahead.
For what it's worth (and, given that the Bush Regime has left our standing in the world in shambles, it ought to be worth quite a lot), The Economist's Global Electoral College shows that most of the world is overwhelmingly in favour of a Barack Obama presidency.
It's interesting to note that, among the many reasons why The Economist does not endorse John McCain, the Sarah Palin pick is yet another indication of the of the sloppiness of the McCain campaign. It is telling that, many of the reasons they give for being unable to support his presidency are much the same reasons I've heard from Republicans who have either moved to support Obama or remain undecided. And if he had paid more attention to the more moderate among the GOP, this may have been a very different campaign.
If only the real John McCain had been running
That, however, was Senator McCain; the Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated. The fiscal conservative who once tackled Mr Bush over his unaffordable tax cuts now proposes not just to keep the cuts, but to deepen them. The man who denounced the religious right as “agents of intolerance” now embraces theocratic culture warriors. The campaigner against ethanol subsidies (who had a better record on global warming than most Democrats) came out in favour of a petrol-tax holiday. It has not all disappeared: his support for free trade has never wavered. Yet rather than heading towards the centre after he won the nomination, Mr McCain moved to the right.
And, most the damning observation of what a mess his 2008 campaign has become:
The Economist, while endorsing Senator Obama, is not all hearts and flowers. They share the concern held by many (myself included) about his resume being on the skimpy side and acknowledge that all the charisma in the world won't fix the fundamental problems we have in the United States and abroad.
But, if the last ten weeks of this campaign have shown American voters anything, it is that John McCain has proven himself wholly incapable of running his own campaign. How in the hell can we expect him to be able to run this country, much less provide the leadership needed to tackle the many crises we face (not forgetting that most of these crises are a result of the failures of the Bush Regime--which had the support of Senator McCain more often than not)?
Labels: in the news, politics
~~ victoria on 1:08 PM ~~ 0 comments
========================================
