Election 2008: Vote Against Bush
So, it is Election Day over the pond today. And millions of people are going to chose which man is going to lead the free world from January. Well, lead the free world and attack any country who messes with his nation.
I think a lot of people will be wanting not so much to vote for McCain or Obama as vote against George W Bush. After all, Bush’s time in the White House has come to resemble not so much a political administration as a series of biblical plagues that has befallen the United States over the past eight years. Seriously, America in 2000 was a prosperous nation with a budget surplus, largely united at home and respected abroad. In 2008, the economy has sunk beneath the waves of a crippling recession, the nation is fighting two increasingly unwinnable wars and the nation seems deeply divided between large liberal enclaves and great swathes of hysterical, Christian fundamentalists. When the flood waters hit New Orleans a few years ago, they didn’t just wreak havoc on that city and its citizens, it also washed away any residual respect and confidence that the majority of the USA had in its leaders.
So yeah, people would be well within their rights to want to vote against W. And if Dubya was running, pretty much any candidate could not so much beat his sorry ass, as bury it in an absolute avalanche of an electoral landslide.
The problem is Bush isn’t running.
In fact, both of the main candidates have made a point of not being George W Bush. Obama’s campaign is pretty much based solely around not being W. If I had to summarise Obama’s campaign, it would be with the Senator standing next to two posters, one saying “Change”, and the other depicting George W Bush. Obama would then alternate, between pointing at the poster saying “change” whilst nodding and smiling, and then pointing at the poster of Bush and shaking his head whilst looking sad. You can praise his campaign as much as you like, but when you truly break it down, it isn’t much more complicated or innovative than that summary.
McCain has also pushed himself away from being associated with George W Bush in anyway. That is no mean feat, since he tends to vote with Bush and is in the same party as the incumbent President. However, he has still managed to treat W as a radioactive lump of crap. His strategy towards Bush has been simple – he wouldn’t touch George Junior with a shitty stick.
So what is the Bush hater to do? Who can they vote against, if they want to voice their strident disapproval of the inbred, slack-jawed shaved chimp of a redneck who has being running their country for the past eight years?
The best plan is to vote against McCain. Not because of who McCain is, or what he stands for. But rather because of his choice of Vice-President.
Make no mistake, Palin represents an extension of George W Bush. A more feminine and slightly more eloquent version, to be sure, but still just an extension of W. She is the same type Christian fundamentalist, gun toting, hunting, creationist, anti-abortion redneck moron as the incumbent President. She is George W Bush’s monster; a cliché of a Republican, born of years of suckling at the teat of the Christian Right. It has nothing to do with gender, and everything to do with her world view. She shares the same mindlessly simplistic outlook on the world as the person who has run the US since 2001. Frankly, she makes Dan Quayle looking like Abraham fucking Lincoln.
Americans will go to the polls today and cast their votes based on a whole host of different factors; the economy, the War on Terror, the characters of the candidates vying to be President and so on. But for anyone wishing to absolutely reject the Bush years, then I urge you to vote for Senator Obama. By rejecting McCain, you will also be rejecting a campaign that feels it is appropriate to put an ignorant, narrow minded idiot within grasping distance of the Presidency as a sop to the Christian Right. Palin represents an extension of the Bush administrations – and surely to Christ 8 years of Bush-esque leadership is enough.
Labels: Election 2008 (US), McCain, Obama, Palin
6 Comments:
Yeah, now there's a smart idea. Vote against the First President to ever appoint a former Libertarian Party State Chairman to a Cabinet level position.
Bush has appointed more Libertarians to his Administration than all other previous Presidents combined.
But who needs friends that help out libertarians, right? If someone reaches out to you, just kick 'em in the teeth.
Bush reaching out to Libertarians? Don't make me laugh.
Bush brought the Patriot Act into being.
He is opposed to abortion.
He is opposed to stem cell research.
His administration has effectively condoned torture.
He is pro-death penalty.
He...
Oh, I could go on, but you get the point.
Regardless of who he has appointed, Bush is about a Libertarian as... well, Gordon Brown. He has very little to do with the Libertarian ideology or viewpoint. Some of his appointments may be Libertarian; his actions and views are decidely not.
So, yeah, I'd vote against him (if I could vote and if he was running). And I'd certainly vote against McCain, purely based on his choice of a Bush style Republican as Vice-President.
TNL
I don't really follow this. Palin is up for VP not because John McCain is crazy about her, but as a pragmatic sop to a contingent of voters he can't win without. It is McCain who is running for president; Palin is just sort of an ineffective tag-along.
I think you're right that a lot of voters want to vote against Bush, but the right way to think about it is: they already have. The Republicans found themselves unable to nominate anyone following directly in his footsteps, he didn't even attend the convention, and McCain has gone out of his way to emphasize his differences with Mr. Bush. So - mission accomplished. The American people have already soundly rejected Mr. Bush and all his evil ways. The question now is who we turn to for the recovery. My advice on that is vote Bob Barr if you're in a solid state, vote McCain if (like me), you're in a swing state. Normally I would advocate voting Libertarian no matter what to split the vote, but Sen. Obama is just a bit more extreme than most, and looking at a compliant Congress to boot. Now is not a time we can afford symbolic "voting against Bush" gestures.
Jeez.
To clarify: my problem is with Palin, not McCain. McCain has put a right wing fundamentalist fruit loop on his ticket. And if he wins, then there is a real chance (given McCain's age and fragile health) that she will end up as President in the next four years. If that happens, we get more of the Bush version of Republican government. McCain can try to distance himself as much as he likes from Bush - his choice of Vice-President is the real problem and has completely undermined those attempts to distance himself from Dubya.
Had McCain gone for a sensible choice for Veep (and he could have chosen far more sane candidates who could have helped him to unite the party) he'd have my support. He didn't.
I doubt many Libertarians would vote Bush in for a third term; a vote for the McCain/Palin ticket though could end up as a vote for a Bush style presidency if McCain shuffles off this mortal coil in the next four years.
TNL
I agree with you re: Palin. A vote for McCain is effectively a vote for her, for the reasons you mentioned. And it could also be argued a vote for Obama is a vote for Biden, since the first black President is going to need that Secret Service detail a bit more than most....
The sad thing about W. - do you remember the huge wave of support here for the USA in the immediate aftermath of 9/11? People were sticking American flags up in their windows, for God's sake. Not much sympathy over here for the "land of the free" anymore, and I'm sure I don't need to explain why...
True, a vote for Obama is a vote for Biden as well. That said, Biden is a pompous, overly verbose lefty twat. If he does inherit the Presidency, he will probably spend all of his time listening to the sound of his own voice rather than actually doing anything. Whereas the evangelical and lunatic Palin could do a great deal of damage.
And I agree with you with regard to Dubya - he had the chance post-9/11 to really be a great President. Sadly, he chose another path.
TNL
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home