If not for the (religious) right wing dominance in the Republican party, the moderates might have a better case for McCain. The right wingers, on the other hand, have a clear choice, even if they have to “settle” for McCain. I agree with people who say that a McCain victory is more or less a 3rd Bush term, because he has to follow a right wing course to stay in power, even if it’s a watered down one. How did he put it? He’ll chase Bin-Ladin to the ends of the earth? I wonder if he’s going to do that himself, or will he delegate the mission? In any case, that kind of rhetoric should be a clear indication that he has a large right wing faction to pander to if he wants to win the White House and keep it. And among other things, a victory for him will mean packing the Supreme and federal courts with more right wing judges when openings arise for at least another 4 years. He has to give the right at least that much.
Looking to the global theatre, is there any doubt that McCain is more likely to get us into another Iraq than Obama is? People who thought there was no substantial difference between Al Gore and W. learned the hard way that indeed there was. And the Iraq invasion is the most obvious example, since there is NO WAY Al Gore would have done that. For those who favor Iraq II because they believe this strategy has made the world a safer and better place, that the thousands of dead, limbless and Post Traumatic Stress inflicted soldiers were sacrificed over there for a very good reason, McCain’s election seems the best hope for more of the same.
As for McCain’s highly-touted experience, how reliable an indication is that in predicting a new president’s foreign policy? Have Bush’s 8 years of experience made him any wiser and set us on a better course?
Another consideration is McCain’s age. If he doesn’t live out his one or two terms, he’ll be replaced by whatever right wing VP he chose as his running mate to get as much of the Christain Right out as he could on voting day in addition to his own moderate supporters. From this angle, too, it looks like a clear choice. Right wing/evangelical: McCain. Non-right wing: Obama.
It seems that a lot of people argue about who they “like” as if having the guy they “like” in the White House is what really matters. But I’m not voting for Obama because I like his crowd-pleasing, charismatic ENFJ personality. It’s important to look beyond the individual candidates to the bigger picture, at what kind of agenda is going to be implemented by the winning party, a progressive or a regressive one.
A Democratic victory means an overall saner policy than the victory of a party with a right wing core dominated by religious fanatics bent on moving the country closer to a theocracy. You’d think that would scare away the libertarians who think voting GOP means greater individual freedom. These are the kind of people who would ban birth control, and as I recall reading a few years ago, the Missouri GOP actually did ban it in state-funded clinics. That’s their version of “small government”: policing our sex lives. And the kind of judges McCain will appoint are ones much more likely to uphold this kind of Taliban-imitation policy whenever it’s challenged in the courts.