THE ECONOMIST WHOLEHEARTEDLY ENDORSES OBAMA
Posted by: The Economist | WASHINGTON
Categories: Barack Obama John McCain US election 2008
THE ECONOMIST today endorses Barack Obama for president. As a review of our past endorsements shows, the newspaper's (and this blog's) favour should not have been taken for granted. When we have chosen to endorse, we have tilted for both Republicans and Democrats. And despite the largely disappointing general election campaign, we find a lot to admire in both candidates. John McCain in particular has shown courage in the past sticking to unpopular but sensible positions on things like free trade and immigration reform.
But what happened in this campaign cannot be ignored, either. From our leader:
The Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated. The fiscal conservative who once tackled Mr Bush over his unaffordable tax cuts now proposes not just to keep the cuts, but to deepen them. The man who denounced the religious right as "agents of intolerance" now embraces theocratic culture warriors. The campaigner against ethanol subsidies (who had a better record on global warming than most Democrats) came out in favour of a petrol-tax holiday. It has not all disappeared: his support for free trade has never wavered. Yet rather than heading towards the centre after he won the nomination, Mr McCain moved to the right.
Meanwhile his temperament, always perhaps his weak spot, has been found wanting. Sometimes the seat-of-the-pants method still works: his gut reaction over Georgia-to warn Russia off immediately-was the right one. Yet on the great issue of the campaign, the financial crisis, he has seemed all at sea, emitting panic and indecision. Mr McCain has never been particularly interested in economics, but, unlike Mr Obama, he has made little effort to catch up or to bring in good advisers (Doug Holtz-Eakin being the impressive exception).
The choice of Sarah Palin epitomised the sloppiness. It is not just that she is an unconvincing stand-in, nor even that she seems to have been chosen partly for her views on divisive social issues, notably abortion. Mr McCain made his most important appointment having met her just twice.
Mr Obama, on the other hand, has run his campaign brilliantly, and that does matter.
It is not just that he has more than held his own against Mr McCain in the debates. A man who started with no money and few supporters has out-thought, out-organised and outfought the two mightiest machines in American politics-the Clintons and the conservative right.
Political fire, far from rattling Mr Obama, seems to bring out the best in him: the furore about his (admittedly ghastly) preacher prompted one of the most thoughtful speeches of the campaign. On the financial crisis his performance has been as assured as Mr McCain's has been febrile. He seems a quick learner and has built up an impressive team of advisers, drawing in seasoned hands like Paul Volcker, Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. Of course, Mr Obama will make mistakes; but this is a man who listens, learns and manages well.
Of course, Mr Obama isn't perfect. A vote for Mr Obama is still a risk, if a calculated one.
Our main doubts about Mr Obama have to do with the damage a muddle-headed Democratic Congress might try to do to the economy. Despite the protectionist rhetoric that still sometimes seeps into his speeches, Mr Obama would not sponsor a China-bashing bill. But what happens if one appears out of Congress? Worryingly, he has a poor record of defying his party's baronies, especially the unions... The risk remains that on economic matters the centre that Mr Obama moves to would be that of his party, not that of the country as a whole.
So Mr Obama in that respect is a gamble. But the same goes for Mr McCain on at least as many counts, not least the possibility of President Palin. And this cannot be another election where the choice is based merely on fear. In terms of painting a brighter future for America and the world, Mr Obama has produced the more compelling and detailed portrait. He has campaigned with more style, intelligence and discipline than his opponent. Whether he can fulfil his immense potential remains to be seen. But Mr Obama deserves the presidency.
And, by the way, he will probably get it. Here's to hoping Mr Obama's moderate and sensible side wins over his primary-season, protectionist-populist side.
(Photo credit: AFP)
Permalink Comments (29)CommentsSIR –
Report item as: (required) X Obscenity/vulgarity Hate speech Personal attack Advertising/Spam Copyright/Plagiarism Other Comment: (optional)
Sertorius wrote:
What a complete shock!
10/30/2008 4:09 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
hf howard wrote:
Barack Obama is clearly the right choice. He has shown repeatedly that he packs the gear to lead this country, and that what he offers is just what the US needs right now.
10/30/2008 4:23 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
Kaveh wrote:
Absolutely the right choice. McCain would probably be a decent president, but Obama will likely be an exceptional one.
I can't wait to see how much difference it makes to once again have a US president who is intelligent, curious and restrained.
Let's hope the US electorate gives us the chance to find out.
10/30/2008 4:25 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
Paul W. wrote:
TPM today asked the question "mandate for what," laying out the fact that many people are never exactly clear what they are voting for other than a feeling that a leader will take the country in the right direction.
I would like to ask others what they are voting FOR when they go to the polls on the 4th, whether you be for McCain or Obama. I am voting for an unwinding of the politicization of the justice system, a return to respecting the Constitution when it comes to habeas corpus or the 4th amendment, and for a dismantling of the ridiculous amount of power arbitrarily vested in the executive branch while we were in a "time of crisis" yet have not been given back to us as we are clearly past the point when the threats abroad justified them.
I want to see American's be respected by their president instead of seen as a group of people who need to be duped, though Obama has done some of this as well, and who refuses to take outside advice (or in the case of John McCain has become subject to his advisers).
10/30/2008 4:33 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
OneAegis wrote:
I may be attacked for this, however in a very "nuanced" way, I want a return to "country first." As the markets have shown recently, this credo has been disatrous to the USA. I very much believe in market economics; however in a sense I believe the governments role is to harness the creative power of its people, and make sensible policies to insure that the "me first" attitude also pulls the country along with it. If that makes any sense at all...
10/30/2008 5:10 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
Jan Kees wrote:
Washington: This is a nice recap of the article. I would have liked to have seen some inside dirt. Was the vote contentious or did you easily find consensus? My guess is that latter. The kindest words I've seen about McCain in this newspaper was that the 2000 version was pretty cool. I generally agree with your endorsement.
10/30/2008 5:13 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
simon says wrote:
I would agree with all those items you note as favoring Obama over McCain. However, I prefer to base my personal assessment on what the person has done rather than what the person says. As you properly note, both men have shifted their rhetoric to the right relative to their past actions. In the end though, it is easier to change your words than your personality. Both will shift back to their personal behaviors after being elected. This will push Obama to the left of center of his own party, let alone the center of the country. But the center of the country is where McCain has come from and is where he will return to. So, if your goal is to endorse a moderate, you fallen short.
As for Sarah Palin, I agree she was a poor choice and don't feel she is up to running the country. But I am voting for a president, not a VP. And she can't get into too much trouble in a partial term during which she will have to contend with a Democrat dominated congress. Besides, I'm not too sure I want to have a person who believes FDR was President and spoke to the nation on TV during the 1929 crash - So Joe B is no real catch either.
10/30/2008 5:18 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
atomsareenough wrote:
paul w., these are the main things i am voting for, in no particular order: a tax cut; a more pragmatic and humble foreign policy which better manages both our hard and soft power; a more universal health care system with greater access for everyone and lower costs across the board; fiscal responsibility; greater transparency and accountability and ethical behavior from the executive branch; and investments in alternative energy and education.
10/30/2008 5:26 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
chiefthe wrote:
I have already cast my ballot for Obama.
I voted against the anti-intellectualism that has been on display for the past 8 years and is revered by too many in the GOP. I voted for reasoned, measured, informed decision making.
Most of all I voted for arugula!
10/30/2008 5:29 PM GST
Recommend Report Abuse
MrTaxLawyer wrote:
It was a foregone conclusion that the Economist would endorse Obama, but I was interested to see how they would rationalize it. Sure, McCain, is a feeble candidate, but Obama quite openly supports greater trade barriers, higher marginal tax rates, more social engineering through the tax code, greater redistribution of wealth, more unionization, greater payroll taxes to prop up an antiquated Social Security system, and greater government spending all around. How does this square with the Economist's principles?
Ah, I see, it's all about temperment, as demonstrated by Obama's performance during the financial crisis. Apparently he gets high marks because he did ... what? Obama didn't do anything during the crisis except keep making speeches, and, his having been my state or federal senator for many years, I can say that is precisely the problem with him: He's never *done* anything, except make speeches to friendly crowds.
Hopefully Obama will be a great president, but there is honestly no reason to think he will be even a mediocre one.
10/30/2008 5:40 PM GST