Friday, February 8, 2008

Independents bewilder me.

A new poll on the presidential race gives more or less typical results:

Obama captured 48% of the vote in the theoretical match-up against McCain's 41%, the TIME poll reported, while Clinton and McCain would deadlock at 46% of the vote each. Put another way, McCain looks at the moment to have a narrowly better chance of beating the New York Senator than he does the relative newcomer from Illinois.
I can understand not wanting to associate with either of the major political parties, I guess, but I have a hard time making sense of results like this. What are the substantive differences independents see between an Obama presidency and a Clinton presidency, such that one is less desirable than a McCain presidency and the other is more desirable than a McCain presidency?

I see plenty of stylistic and tonal differences, but we're not electing a style or a tone, we're electing a president -- a president who will either end or continue a war in Iraq, who will either repudiate or continue the Bush-Cheney abuses of executive power, who will appoint judges to the Supreme Court and lower courts, who will make policies concerning how government responds to the looming economic downturn, who will either address or continue to ignore climate change. And so on.

Right?

No comments: