Obama or McCain - who would you vote for?

[RF]

With voting in the US Presidential Election only a month away, I think it is an opportune moment to pose this question, especially as some members of this forum will have the right to cast a vote in this election. If you are one of them, would you vote, if so for which one and why?

For myself I don't find either of the candidates particulary inspiring. Obama does to some extent remind me of Jimmy Carter, while McCain is even older than Reagan was back in the 1980 Election. What do you think?

[Bgile]

I have a lot of respect for McCain. He is a war hero and has had a long and distinguished career. However, he represents a further continuation of disasterous policies of the Bush/Cheney administration which have brought our country and indeed the world to the brink of another depression.

Sarah Palin has not previously shown much interest in the world outside Alaska. She doesn't seem to understand the issues which have challenged our country over the last decade, and the only answers she can give to media questions about these things are to spout party slogans and change the subject. She is pretty and personable, and acceptable to the religious right of the Republican party. In short, similar to Bush when he ran for the first time.

Obama seems to be very bright and well read. He understands the issues confronting our country and I believe he would make good decisions.

His running mate (Joe Biden) is a foreign policy expert. Again, a very well read and intelligent man.

Both both Democratic candidates try to give thoughtful answers to questions from the media, because they know a lot about the world and the problems confronting the US.

I will vote for Obama, but will be pleasantly surprised if he isn't assassinated.

In any case, I'm afraid we all have some very hard times ahead of us.

[RF]

Why do you think that a President Obama would be assassinated?

US Presidents are much more heavily protected than in 1963.

[Bgile]

Why do you think that a President Obama would be assassinated?

US Presidents are much more heavily protected than in 1963.

Because he is black and we have some real crazies here, that's all. I hope I'm wrong.

[Vic Dale]

As a British citizen, I will not get to vote in the US presidential election. If I did have the vote there I would not be likely to vote for Obama, except to pay the republicans out for Bush.

Mc Cain is a spent force as a human being and belongs in a retirement home. His choice of Palin as running mate is a clear expression of encouraging a young and inexperienced sprinter to set an impossible pace in the hope of exhausting the opposition. Mc Cain may then catch up and part the tape when all others are dead. In any case, I am sure that he will be applauded for trying at such an advanced age. In the unlikely event that he does win, it will be an act of immnse generosity on the part of the US public - equal to lend-lease.

Palin reminds me of Mussolini's daughter - another beauty queen who also dabbled in Italian politics. Good to look at and with a big mouth, but dead from the neck up.

Obama is slick, no doubt about that and is well tutored in the art of speaking without saying anything substantial. That lack of substance may actually keep him alive long enough to be sworn in - he is unlikely to make any major changes. We can equate his "Time for Change!" with Blair's "It can only get better." Plenty of fizz, but still the same bland liberal flavour. "It" didn't get better and "it" probably won't change. Still, an articulate head of state will make a refreshing change for the USA.

I hope my lack of bias is appreciated, I would hate to say anything which might upset the natural balance.

I have been watching the development of an insipient labour party in the USA to be based on the trade unions. When that particular horse starts to run, things will get very interesting over there. It has been in existence with an elected steering commitee for some 12 years now, but the unions are hesitant to launch the party forward into elections for fear that they may tip the balance and let the republicans in, despite the fact that it has the support of many millions of US workers.

Personally I doubt there could ever be a good time to launch a political party and the current economic crisis may well become the midwife for the birth of this terrible young giant. US workers would have nothing to lose by backing their own party and four years of Obama may well convince them of this - if he lasts that long.

We are living through interesting times - to inject a piece of typically British understatement - and though an administration may be sworn in for four years, that does not necessarily mean that it will go full-term. Immense social pressure is building in the USA and with the economic instability, which will not just go away, changes in the US social structure may be sudden and of a magnitude which takes everyone by surprise.

The US presidential elections are being watched by the world, but it is entirley possible that it may be eclipsed by an unforseen event which is much more interesting. Stranger things have happened.

Vic Dale

[Bgile]

I am a labor union member. In fact, I went on strike last year for the first time in my life. I'm unaware of the party to which you refer, and for the most part unions support the Democratic Party.

Reagan went a long way toward destroying labor unions in the USA when he broke the PATCO union and as far as I know membership has declined ever since.

[dougieo]

Why do you think that a President Obama would be assassinated?

US Presidents are much more heavily protected than in 1963.

Because he is black and we have some real crazies here, that's all. I hope I'm wrong.

Sadly I think his skin colour may affect the way some people vote, and as good as protection may be it only takes a small lapse of concentraion for one of the crazies to get lucky.

Given the current problems with the banking system whoever gets in will have a tough time.

[Bgile]

I agree.

It's true that there are a lot of US citizens who rule out voting for any black person. Sadly, my own wife's sister and her family are amoung them. They live in North Carolina and are typical of the people there.

Ironically, Obama got the nomination BECAUSE he is black. He got about 90% of the black vote, whereas Hillary Clinton got only about 60% IIRC of the women.

Both things upset me, because neither situation is because of the man's qualifications.

[lwd]

I'm probably going to vote for McCain. Reasons as follows:
1) I think partisan politics has been a serious problem for the last several years. I think McCain has a better chance working with both sides to get things done.
2) The religious right has gotten too much influence in the Republican party. A victory by McCain may cut into that a loss by him may result in them getting stronger.
3) Obama's plans don't seam to make sense. Add a lot of social programs and not raise taxes on the middle class. How do you do that?
4) Change for changes sake is not necessarily desirable. Not even clear how effective Obama would be at changing things. It's far easier for an insider to than an outsider.
5) I don't think a good number of Obama's proposals are likely to be beneficial.

Obama is almost assuredly going to get more votes because of his ancestry than he will loose. If you look at any major contest (from big city mayor up) when an African American candidate runs against a European American candidate the latter can almost always count on overwhelming support from the African American community. The other candidate can't count on it from his.

[Karl Heidenreich]

lwd:

I'm probably going to vote for McCain.

At last you make sense!

[RF]

Why do you think that a President Obama would be assassinated?

US Presidents are much more heavily protected than in 1963.

Because he is black and we have some real crazies here, that's all. I hope I'm wrong.

Why is there this obssession with Obama being black?

Look at Obama closely. His skin colour is light brown. He is not black, he is of mixed race, as virtually all of us are,

Obama is no more black than Nick Griffin (who is a fairly dark skinned Caucasion male) the leader of the British National Party.

[RF]

I have been watching the development of an insipient labour party in the USA to be based on the trade unions. When that particular horse starts to run, things will get very interesting over there. It has been in existence with an elected steering commitee for some 12 years now, but the unions are hesitant to launch the party forward into elections for fear that they may tip the balance and let the republicans in, despite the fact that it has the support of many millions of US workers.

Personally I doubt there could ever be a good time to launch a political party...

Vic Dale

Why not use the existing structure of the US Democratic Party?

Incidently the issue of vote splitting is not as great as it might seem, given the loose nature of the US party system.

[RF]

I agree.

It's true that there are a lot of US citizens who rule out voting for any black person. Sadly, my own wife's sister and her family are amoung them. They live in North Carolina and are typical of the people there.

Currently Obama is supposed to be ahead in Noth Carolina and also Virginia, states that have voted Republican since 1976 and 1964 respectively.

[dougieo]

Why do you think that a President Obama would be assassinated?

US Presidents are much more heavily protected than in 1963.

Because he is black and we have some real crazies here, that's all. I hope I'm wrong.

Why is there this obssession with Obama being black?

Look at Obama closely. His skin colour is light brown. He is not black, he is of mixed race, as virtually all of us are,

Obama is no more black than Nick Griffin (who is a fairly dark skinned Caucasion male) the leader of the British National Party.

Its how the world works, I am classed as white but is my skin white? NO!!

People get classidied into groups thats all.

[Vic Dale]

I have been watching the development of an insipient labour party in the USA to be based on the trade unions. When that particular horse starts to run, things will get very interesting over there. It has been in existence with an elected steering commitee for some 12 years now, but the unions are hesitant to launch the party forward into elections for fear that they may tip the balance and let the republicans in, despite the fact that it has the support of many millions of US workers.

Personally I doubt there could ever be a good time to launch a political party...

Vic Dale

Why not use the existing structure of the US Democratic Party?

Incidently the issue of vote splitting is not as great as it might seem, given the loose nature of the US party system.

If working people are to be properly represented they must have their own independent political party. The bat and ball game of repubilcans and democrats has seen the decline of the US economy and with increasing erosion of workers rights and health provision. If they get seriously ill they die. Many would prefer not to be told if they are seriously ill so they won't be encourged to spend what little money the family has managed to save - saving them. Instead of doctors, many Americans go to quacks and charlatans who offer affordable, though often completely ineffective remedies. That is why there is so much religious fervour there. They have little else but prayer.

Those who cannot afford doctors have recourse to state funded charity, but many workers are left to die because doctors refuse to diagnose anything more serious than a headache for these charity cases. I know of one person with bone cancer in her knee who was treated with simple analgesia - just a bit of arthritis - when a proper scan and biopsy would have revealed the cancer. Poor people are diagnosed, yet cannot afford the exorbitant costs of the medicine - decent doctors trying to help them have to resort to appealing for returned medicines from which to prescribe. Poor people with terminal sickness or dementia have been put into cabs and dumped outside charity hospitals

This is one issue on which both the republicans and the democrats have failed the workers. They have failed because much of their campaign funding comes from the drug companies, so they won't challenge them. A true workers party should be funded by the workers themselves through union dues. Their representatives should be their own people, long term ried and tested tardeunionsits, who have demonstrtaed the will to fight for worker's rights. they should be paid no more than the average wage and their expenses and other income closely scrutnised to see they are not being corrupted.

I think it is pretty certain that there will be no worker's party standing in this election and if one did spring up it may well not be the one I was watching - The Steering Committee for a Party Of Labour. Often this sort of organisation springs onto the scene out of the blue - a spontaneous expression of politcal anger on the part of workers frustrated with being held back on the industrial plane.

I agree that tipping the balance is not such a threat as some people think, but unions and union leaders are very conservative and hesitate to make a move which may show them as having made a mistake. That is why I don't like to see workers representatives paid more than those they represent. Then they would have nothing to lose and could take a bolder approach to their actions.

Vic Dale