Why I won’t vote in a McCain/Clinton election

By Joshua Kagi April 29th, 2008 Email this post Post a comment

I’m a romantic when it comes to democracy. Early on in college I immersed myself in greek literature and philosophy, and I’ve studied early American history. To say the least, I know my civics.

I’ve often felt that it’s not only a right of every American, but an obligation to vote — and not just vote, but vote knowledgeably. If people put half the time into considering who they’d support in their local, regional, and national elections as they did into watching and voting on American Idol or Dancing with the Stars, we’d be a much better nation.

But despite our nations overall ignorance and apathy, I’ve tended to hold onto my romantic idealism when it comes to “one vote making a difference;” And maybe, one vote still can make a difference, but when it comes to presidential politics, what’s the point anymore?

For me, it’d be a bit of a stretch to say both parties are the same. They’re similar in many instances, but they still have their key differences. The problem with the parties however, regardless of their dis/similarity is that neither one represents the American people anymore. (If they ever did to begin with?)

One thing is for sure… neither party represents me. Nor do I see how any political party ever could, unless I created a party of one. (And is a party of one really a party?) People are too different. There may be plenty of single issue voters out there (i.e. abortion or gun rights) that feel they can fit into their party, but overall I think most people are hybrids of several different political philosophies (Yes, there are more than two). Personally, I’m never going to agree with one party 100-percent of the time. Hell, 50-percent of the time would be an amazing feat.

So, despite the fact that I’m registered as a member of one of the parties (per Oregon primary rules, so that I can vote for Obama on May 20th), I am truly independent. I’ve never voted strictly down a party line — nor do I ever want to be one of those people who says “I could never vote for a democrat (or republican).”

Getting to the point of this post, if Clinton somehow overtakes Obama using the super delegates to do so — and wins the Democratic nomination — setting up a McCain/Clinton general election, I won’t be casting a vote.

I’ve made no secret of my support for Barack Obama, in the primary and in the general election. I feel that he is the breath of fresh air that this country so desperately needs. He is this generations John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy or Martin Luther King Jr. And when it comes down to it, whether you agree with his policies or not, it cannot be denied that Obama has the rare gift of inspiring thousands upon thousands to act.

On the other hand, Hilary Clinton is a product of the political machine. Over the last two decades, she has been groomed to be a legitimate Presidential Candidate, doing and saying all the right things, building up relationships with the “right people,” and always using her Senate vote to garner more popularity. (In 2002, voting yes on the Iraq war was the popular thing to do).

In and of itself, being a part of the political elite would not make you a poor elected official. But, when is enough enough? Since the days of Tammany Hall, political machines have been set up to groom and polish candidates for public consumption, only for the public to later realize that the person they elected is a fraud.

Is it any wonder why elected officials are among the least trusted people on the planet?

Isn’t it time to support someone who communicates to the American public as adults, and doesn’t buy into blind patriotism (i.e. wearing a flag pin), but is rather a true patriot who has spent a lifetime helping those who’ve been disenfranchised by other politicians who were more concerned with making English “the official language” of the United States and other trivialities?

Finally, John McCain is absolutely NOT a member of the political machine. The fact that he won the Republican nomination is a miracle in my book. I was one of the strongest McCain supporters in the 2000 primary (despite the fact I was not of age to vote), and continued to believe in him and support him through 2004. You could say I was a McCainiac, waiting for the day he’d be able to run for president again.

Now that day is here, I’ve been completely turned off by the political maneuvering McCain has done in order to win the nomination.

What made McCain my ideal candidate in 2000, was the fact that he was not a member of, nor did he cater to the Religious Right. He was a maverick who blazed his own path. However, in order to win the nomination in 2008, McCain learned from “mistakes” made in the 2000 primary, and changed his ways in attempt to win the Religious Right over; as a result, McCain has turned into a “Bush’s third term” candidate.

I understand that politics is a game, and to be electable you have to cater to various groups that often conflict with each other. But the 2008 version of McCain is absolutely not the 2000 version I supported; and while I feel a lot of it is strictly primary season maneuvering to win the nomination, McCain is now in bed with some people who will hold him to his primary campaign promises.

In the end, for America to be able to improve over the next four years, I feel our ONLY choice is Obama. The same old politics don’t work anymore, and I hope that Americans haven’t become apathetic or numb to the point of realizing that it can change this year by voting for Obama.


This post is tagged , , ,

3 Comments

  1. Josh,

    I can see where you’re coming from, but may I offer a different view?

    Sometimes in life there will be the lesser of two evils. Sounds worse than it really is, but between McCain and Clinton, I’d guess you already know who would best represent your values. That doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything they stand for, or even how they’ve changed their politics. But that doesn’t negate their ability to govern in a way that you believe is superior to the other candidate.

    I was watching some political analysts yesterday and they defined the major difference between Clinton and Obama this way: style vs. substance. Obama is the new wave of fresh energy, inspiring speeches, and promises for change and unity. Clinton offers more substantive ideas for policies, experience, and a long, well-vetted record.

    Is one better than the other? Not necessarily. But I tend to agree with the analysts that the vote - as long as it’s not decided by the superdelegates - will come down to style vs. substance. It’s obvious in their speeches and campaign messages: Clinton is trying to sell her knowledge and experience, while Obama is trying to sell change. Personally, I believe all three candidates are well-qualified and able to lead this country. Which do I believe is best? I’m still trying to figure that out.

    Here’s a quote I come across:

    “Bad politicians are sent to Washington by good people who don’t vote.”

    William E. Simon

  2. I don’t think you’re going to have to worry much Josh, because everyone’s saying Obama has the nomination in the bag.
    Everyone except Hilary that is…

  3. Looks like you’ll be able to vote this fall :-)

Leave a Reply