|
croc, fair point.
However, as it's the only game we've got, one of them will be picked, even if only one voter votes (recent movie on a dead heat with one voter having to decide - Kevin Costner, title escapes me. It flopped at the box office, surprise!).
So, for many it's Obama with 'change and hope' despite having no idea what that will entail, as long as it's 'change from Bush.'
For another large block of voters, me included, it will be pulling the lever for McCain, a lackluster conservative at best, but he's the lesser of the two evils we're faced with.
If the Congress remains or grows more Democratic, then a Republican in the White House can help keep the pendulum from swinging too far to the left - also regarding the Supreme Court as several replacements are expected during the next four years.
If a Democratic President teams up with a really left-leaning Democratic Congress, led by Pelosi and Reid, then I fear (happy GTF? I FEAR this scenario), then along with an uber-left Supreme Court, the political and governmental institutions will go too far left and cause too much harm to our nation.
Can you imagine today's economic clown show being handled entirely by one party or the other in the executive and legislative branches? If it were the Republicans, then perhaps, the bailout might not have passed and/or not have been as intrusive or, in my mind, un-Constitutional. Or it might, I don't know.
If it were, or will be a very leftist Democratic triumverant (sp?), then I think you could liken us to a much larger France (but with, mostly, better hygiene.). The central government would become even more so on social issues and less so on security ones. While I'm not happy about Uncle Sam having too much power in any aspect of my life, at least the priorities should include keeping the country (and me) physically safe.
|