"Why Shouldn't I Vote For McCain?"

Seems a pretty simple question, really...one that I could easily answer.

However, this weekend, that question stumped me. I can certainly come up with several reasons, but when it comes to definitively answering that question for someone on the fence, I felt tongue tied.

I made my decision LONG ago that I wasn't going to vote for McCain. As such, I wasn't prepared to answer, with details, exactly WHY someone who was undecided shouldn't go the McCain route. So, I did my research, and I'm ready to lay out the reasons I'm NOT voting for McCain.


McCain: What Can He Do For the U.S.?

I'm going to narrow my reasons down to three, for the sake of space, and to keep from "beating a dead horse."

1. Palin.


2. World Standing.


3. The Economy.
   

Palin
The first reason not to vote for McCain is because Palin is a nutjob. A cute, insufferably charming nutjob, but a nutjob nonetheless. She is woefully unqualified, she shares the same "shoot from the hip" mentality as George Dubya Bush, and she has a problem with understanding the difference between her personal life and her professional life (i.e. Abuse of power, a lack of deference for the separation of Church and State).

Statistically, McCain has a good chance of croaking. If he croaks, everyone has GOT to remember that Palin will be president. Even if he DOESN'T croak, given that the choice for Palin is the most important decision he's made all campaign, I don't know if he'll have the kind of judgment we need in a president.

World Standing
You can be in denial all you want, America's standing in the world has declined in the past 8 years. If you're REALLY in denial, ask yourself one question... Would Russia have threatened the U.S. Circa 2000 with military action? Well, they've told us that they'd be "forced" to use military aggression if we 1) Go forward with plans to build a missile defense system near their borders; or 2) If NATO includes Georgia and other former U.S.S.R. territories.

We have been a "uni-polar" global society since the fall of the Berlin Wall. "Uni-Polar," of course, meaning that we are the only superpower. However, our status as the world's sole hegemon has deteriorated. Given the increase in influence of Russia and China, we're steadily on our way to being a "Tri-Polar" global community. We need to have someone in office who will not immediately ruffle foreign feathers when they show up for a meeting.

That person is not John McCain. His aggressive stance towards Russia this summer, while warranted, puts us at a disadvantage. I'm not saying give them a free pass, or coddle them... that's certainly not how JFK defused the situation in 1962. No, I'm talking about calm leadership.

Based on the accounts of McCain's demeanor I've read, he is passionate to a fault, and quick to anger. Where did these accounts come from? Members of his staff, and from the horse's own mouth. Observe:

• Dan Schnur, McCain's Press Secretary in 2000, has been quoted as saying“If I tried to convince you he does not have a temper, you should hang up on me and ridicule me in print.”


• In his autobiography, McCain himself admits to sometimes being immature and having an "unprofessional reaction to slights," which he says are similar to the way he reacted to provocations as a child. (You can read more here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/03/AR2008020303242.html)

That is not a man whose finger I want on the button. That is also not a man I want meeting with other known hotheads, like Kim Jung Il.

Furthermore, IF we have to go to war with other nations, we can't do it alone. Our military is stretched so thin we're letting violent felons in under certain circumstances. We can't even properly fight in Afghanistan because we're too tied up with Iraq. If Russia decides to make good on their threats, then how will we cope? We'll have to go to other countries and ask for their help. Senator Obama, based on his support from foreign heads of state, is in a much better position to request assistance than is Senator McCain.

The Economy
Economically, we're screwed. Our deficit is skyrocketing, our banks are failing, our economic failures are sending shockwaves across the globe. What does McCain want to do about this?

He wants to keep giving more to the rich, in the hopes it will "trickle down." Trickle down Economics (also known as Supply Side Economics) has been proven ineffective OVER AND OVER AGAIN. It didn't work when Reagan did it, it didn't work when Bush 1 did it, and it hasn't worked with Dubya either. Don't believe me? Check out your bank account.

That's only one error in his policies. Even his policies that benefit the middle class are flawed, mainly because his economic advisers are trying to craft policies about a sector they know nothing about.

The Economists for Obama Blog explains in detail the financial advisers McCain has (read about them in detail at http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2008/06/other-list-mccains-economists.html):

Phil Gramm, who is a big proponent of deregulation, whose policies are cited as one of the main contributing factors to the economic crisis we're in now.
(See Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/725/)
For purposes of full disclosure, he is no longer an official advisor for the campaign. However, his hands are all over a lot of McCain's economic policies.

Carly Fiorina, who was the fired as the CEO of HP. The Economists for Obama blog quoted Associate Dean of Executive Programs at the Yale School of Management, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, as having said,"What a blind spot this is in the McCain campaign to have elevated her stature and centrality in this way. You couldn’t pick a worse, non-imprisoned C.E.O. to be your standard-bearer.” The Times has said that "it is hard to see why a woman widely criticized for mismanaging one of Silicon Valley’s legendary companies is advising and representing a candidate who acknowledged last year that he did not understand the economy as well as he should."

Donald Luskin is a college dropout who has been in the private sector for years, and is currently the CIO of TrendMacrolytics, a consulting firm focusing on Macroeconomics. However, he also who recently wrote in a Washington Post column that "we're on the brink not of recession, but of accelerating prosperity." (9-14-2008: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202415.html)

Arthur Laffer, who is the originator of the Laffer curve, the fringe view that claims government revenue increases when tax rates are lowered. He is, according to the NY Times, the "renowned proponent of supply-side economics," even though his theories that the tax revenues rise when taxes are cut (which doesn't make a lick of sense to me, does it you?) Interestingly enough, the Character Larry Laffer of the bawdy "Leisure Suit Larry" games is named after him.

These people are not pre-programed to write policies benefiting the middle class. They are firm believers that giving rich people more money creates a trickle down effect. How do you expect them to look out for Joe the Plumber when they have spent their ENTIRE CAREERS looking out for Joe the Investment Banker?

Obama, on the other hand...

VP Pick: He's chosen a strong and well-respected vice presidential candidate. In a stark contrast to Palin, Biden usually gets dogged for knowing too much, and trying to share everything he knows in a long-winded way. He also gets flack for exaggerating things, but I feel there are few politicians on the national stage who don't exaggerate. (Foreign policy experience because you can see part of Russia from Alaska? Really?)

Getting Along With World Leaders: Obama has proven his ability to converse with foreign leaders, and was even hailed by Jalal Talabani as having a superior plan for peace in Iraq. The Chicago Tribune noted that during his meetings with foreign leaders in the Middle East and Europe this past July, he proved to be "at ease and confident with potential future negotiating partners." (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-obama_dorning_7.26jul27,0,3777238.story)

Economic Staff Better Prepared for THIS Economic Atmosphere: Finally, his economic staff has expertise in "shared growth," "progressive policies," and "issues affecting working families." His advisor list features two former Treasury secretaries, a former vice-chairman and a former chairman of the federal reserve. If you want to talk experience, it's McCain's team that lacks it. (See details about all of Obama's economic advisers here: http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2008/06/obama-economic-advisors-and-economic.html).

So there you have it. Clear reasons I think Obama is a better choice than McCain. Thank you, Renee, for making me feel like an uninformed idiot so I'd have a better answer for anyone who wants to know.