Just a nod to the fact that a majority of my readers are US voters, some of them are in Pennsylvania, and the polls have not yet closed. It’s still the 22nd over there.
- It’s a no-brainer that with all the animosity between the two campaigns, there are people who have become intransigent and who are voting for their candidate for BAD reasons, primarily the foo-isms.
- It’s also a no-brainer that either candidate would make a better President than John McCain: they both have strong positives to offer and there are GOOD reasons to vote for either Obama or Clinton. Not everybody who will vote for the Other Candidate is doing so for foo-ist reasons.
If I were a US citizen? First, I would definitely be voting for the Democratic candidate in November no matter who ends up winning the nomination at the Party convention (and the margin is much closer than when other primary races, both Democratic and Republican, have gone toe-to-toe until the convention).
As a left-libertarian progressive, neither candidate’s policies thrill me as any sort of dream candidate – they are both centrists with very similar policy positions who have been promoted vociferously by different arms of the Party (the DNC and Chicago machines). However, in the primaries, I would vote for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama for two particular reasons which tip the scales for me:
1. The GOP smear machine: Clinton has spent the last 15 years being smeared by it, she has stood strong against the dirt, and there is no new dirt that Rove’s apprentices can throw at her. Kerry folded when he was Swiftboated, Clinton has shown that she never will. Obama is untested by comparison.
2. Reproductive Choice: Clinton is rock-solid. Read that linked transcript – Obama wants to find “common ground” with anti-abortion zealots.
(ETA: I overlooked the H/T to Kate Harding)