Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Election Reflection Part 2 - Democrats

When I sat down to study the two Democratic candidates, I was determined to make a choice based on issues, not personality. To my surprise, I found their positions so similar that personality is one of the few things that separates them. They propose nearly identical health plans, though Clinton would require participation and Obama would let people choose (I appreciate that). The only difference in their approach to Iraq is that Obama insists we’ll be out sixteen months after he takes office, while Clinton estimates it will take a year but declines to give an exact date (which I think is reasonable). Their plans to address illegal immigration are essentially identical: border security, crackdown on employers, learn English + pay fine = citizenship. As for the experience issue, I don’t think either candidate has a monopoly. Clinton knows more ins and outs of the system, but Obama recognized Iraq was a quagmire from the get-go.

The more I read about these two candidates, the more I became convinced that the question was not “Whose positions are most similar to mine?” but rather “Which of these candidates would I want as my leader?” I view Senator Clinton much the same way I see Governor Romney. Both are intelligent and driven. They do their homework and are tireless in the pursuit of their objectives. I do not doubt that both would be effective leaders, but I’m not convinced they would lead in a direction I want to go. Clinton is a divisive figure, and she represents a political establishment that I think has some serious flaws. Perhaps she works the system grudgingly, but she certainly doesn’t make an effort to improve it.

By contrast, Senator Obama stands for openness, unity, and positive change. In the weeks leading up to the Iowa primary, his advisors begged him to respond to Clinton’s attacks by smearing her back. He insisted that went against what he stood for, and he’d rather lose the campaign than compromise that principle. I’m impressed that he has largely stuck by that commitment, and I love his idealism. While I don’t think he’ll be able reform Washington or the world in every single way he proposes, I think he will accomplish more in the attempt than others would by embracing the status quo. I love the idea of a president who is both capable and inspiring. In short, I cast my vote in Obama’s favor, and I’m intrigued to see what he’ll do with it. No doubt my Barack Star brother-in-law will be pleased to know that.

I’m not sure how I will vote in November. While there may not be much difference on issues within the parties, there is a vast gulf between them. This jury is still out on health care plans, illegal immigration, and how best to handle the war in Iraq. Good thing I have nine months to think about it all before my next trip to the polls.

One year ago . . . Small talk is a means, not an end

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

This, dearest Kimmy, is one of the foundational reasons I love you so very much! It warms my heart to know that you really sit and reflect on things rather than sticking to any party line or falling for the rhetoric. I think this is particularly the case with respect to Senator Clinton, because I recall you writing in a previous post that you would rather have anyone but her. I must tell you, I respect that so much.

I have not, as yet, decided who I am going to vote for in November, though I'm fairly certain that it will be the Democratic candidate. My dearest husband is squarely behind Senator Obama, for mostly the same reasons you've cited, but I am still making up my mind. I believe that Senator McCain is going to get the Republican nomination and though I actually voted for him in the 2000 primaries, there is something about him now that just rubs me the wrong way. Perhaps it is, as you mentioned in Part I, the very childish, and might I add typically political, method of dealing with the debates. Perhaps it is his new-found social conservatism which I frankly cannot stomach (and thank you for loving me despite that!). I'm not certain.

In any case, a bit of witching hour rambling with the salient point being...I love and respect you so much and this is one of the fundamental reasons! :]

Nate said...

Hey!

Wow I'm glad to hear of your decision. If it's Obama vs. McCain I seriously think that would be great, because the election will really be about issues. Any other matchup will probably be a victory for vultures who make a living stirring up contention and animosity amongst politicians. Obama has said he would use public funding for the general election (meaning no PACs or special interests could engage in quid pro quo) and McCain, well, wrote McCain Feingold.

Also I really think time is on Obama's side...the longer he stays in, the more chance voters have to get to know him.

If he loses the nomination, I desperately hope he will not take the VP spot but rather guest host SportsCenter for the next four years, biding his time (it worked for McCain, right?)

Kimbertac said...

Siobhan, you voted Republican in 2000??? Dang - you keep surprising me, too.

I'm still not sure what to think of McCain. Sometimes he strikes me as a straight-talking centrist, other times he seems like a mudslinging parrot who keeps repeating "Reagan! National Security! Reagan! Reagan!" I'm not sure what we'd really get if we elect him.

Kimberly Bluestocking said...

Er, that comment was mine just now. I forgot I was still in my work account.

Anonymous said...

I did vote Republican in 2000, funny enough! And had McCain won the primaries, I'm hard pressed to say who I actually would have voted for in the November election. It may well have been a Republican year for me!

Heh. And I was wondering who Kimbertac was...I was thinking, "Who else knows me on this blog?" Lol..very odd.

Natalie said...

It's refreshing to read your thoughtful consideration of all the options. Too often I see that people simply follow the cult of their particular party. They are Republican or they are Democrat and that's that. I used to call myself a Republican, mostly because I tend to be conservative. But in recent years I have decided that I am neither Republican nor Democrat. There are things about each party that I simply cannot stand.

I pretty much agree with your assessment of the candidates except that Hillary Clinton has always been a "NO WAY" in my book. I fear that if she and McCain are the choices we're just in for more of the same I-scratch-your-
back-you-scratch-mine kind of politics.

There are so many things I would like to see change...

Science Teacher Mommy said...

What a great post. You really put my own thoughts into words. On my last post, I linked an article about the fundamental differences between Clinton and Obama--and NO, they are not differences of policy. They are differences in the perception of a president's role. Hilary's idea is that a president needs to be in charge, to control the beaurarcray. Barack's idea's go along the lines of being such a great, charismatic leader that people want to follow. I think it is time for a little hope.

And I think that Clinton is wrong to say that she has a better shot against the Republicans. Why? She is counting on all of Obama's supporters when this thing finally goes to November. This is a total fallacy. I think that many of Obama's supporters are as likely to follow McCain as Clinton. Not so with Clinton supporters--these are, in general, your really die-hard Democrats. They will not be likely to vote Republican no matter what. Barack may be inexperienced, but he is not stupid.

And I don't necessarily think Clinton will pick up Obama as a running mate. With Obama out of the way, she'll get the Black vote anyway. She needs a nice white guy in the middle. A southern accent would help. McCain could neutralize the race and gender question by running with Condoleeza Rice.

Isn't it exciting to think that the next President will be somebody worthy of respect and admiration? No matter who of the three front runners it is? I think our country is about to turn over a new leaf.