To turn on CNN, or local TV stations, or to (shudder) check what the Drudge headlines say, one might think that casting a ballot in today's election will result in long lines, huge delays, and possible physical altercations. I can't say that other people in other locations may not face these, among others, as possibilities, but I can say that my trip to the voting station set up in the firehouse in my district was quick and painless.
Given that this was my first time as a New Jersey voter, I had no idea what to expect in terms of turnout, parking, etc., I decided to take my iPod and walk down to the station, which only takes 20 minutes or so. When I arrived at approximately 8:30 this morning, there was no line outside. The firetrucks were parked across the street, and plentiful signs indicated that the booths had been open since 6:00.
One of the (few) benefits of living in the suburbs, especially in a town like Morristown, is that the population is relatively small. I'm a big-city kind of guy, personally, and prefer the hustle and bustle of crowds. I never minded the T stations being packed in Boston, and never had a problem with the phalanx of umbrellas I might encounter while crossing the streets in Portland. But here, it's different. There are a lot fewer people, and/or I hit the polls at just the right time.
From the time I walked through the front door to the time I walked back out, I was inside maybe ten minutes. I brought my voter registration card just in case, but they found me on their voter list almost immediately. I turned around and walked into the curtained voting booth all of eight feet behind the check-in table, and made my picks, knowing full well that New Jersey is apparently going to strongly vote Obama anyway, regardless of my choice.
Here's the thing, though - the one thing that I really, really hate about polls and the influence they could conceivably have prior to the one poll that
actually counts:
What if voters stay home, because they think their candidate has such a big lead in the pre-election polling, and the candidate not favored to win comes out on top? Every vote
does count, even if only to cement and secure an outcome. And, if nothing else, there is an odd sense of satisfaction and pride that comes with simply making a selection. For better or worse, our voices get heard. In a country like this, in a democracy like ours, that's the whole point, isn't it?
That said, I think constructive changes could be made to the process. I would advocate any/all of the following:
1. Oregon, for instance, allows voting by mail, which provides for privacy (in the home) and convenience (no waiting in lines, just dropping a ballot in a collection box).
2. Not all states have "early voting" - I don't understand why not. I think everyone was pretty tired of non-stop election coverage these past few weeks, and it's been especially painful in the last few days prior to election day. The news can make a big deal about the undecideds all they want, but about 90+ percent of voters already knew who they were going to vote for well before today. Why make them wait? Sure, some bombshell might drop in the last remaining hours to make someone who'd already cast a ballot change their mind, but seriously - what are the odds?
3. I prefer this one, myself: Make
federal election day (by law, the Tuesday following the first Monday in November) a national holiday. Everyone gets the day off from work, and we all go vote. According to the Wikipedia link I provided, John Conyers (D-MI) has introduced a bill that would do just that. I think it's a great idea. (Also, the Monday after the Super Bowl. Someone get to work on that one, too.)
Watching the polls over the past week or so left me repeatedly asking myself: mere days left in an important, wall-to-wall covered election, and there are still undecideds? HOW? Seriously, these guys are (pardon the obvious unintended racial implications) as different as night and day! One or the other! Come on, now! My goodness. These are the people I hate getting stuck behind at an ice cream counter. "Can I try the strawberry? Can I try the pistachio? Can I try the strawberry again?"
Then I wipe the tear from my eye ...
So what of my vote? I think it's obvious where my political beliefs lie. I say beliefs, rather than loyalties, because despite what people like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity might say, I consider myself an American first, and a liberal second.
I have had enough of hearing that I am a socialist, or a communist, or that I'm not "putting country first", whatever that means.
I love my country, imperfect as it is. I showed up to vote today. This is a democracy. I can think of nothing more truly American, nothing more patriotic, nothing that "puts country first" more than voting. If they don't like who I'm voting for, fine. Perhaps they should do a better job of trying to convince people why their candidate is better suited for the office instead of complaining about the personal choice that I have made.
But to them, I'm a socialist. I'm a communist.
Yes, I believe in universal healthcare. I believe it is a basic human right to receive medical attention when it is warranted, no matter one's income or social status.
Oh, but that's socialist! But name-calling doesn't make people healthier, does it?
According to this CNN article, almost 45 million people don't have health care coverage. Unreal. It doesn't suit my conscience well to know that someone who works hard at Wal-Mart, for instance, could fall on some ice, break a bone, and be responsible for hundreds of dollars worth of fees. And I don't even want to think about what happens if someone gets cancer.
According to
WalMartWatch.com, "Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the United States, with over 1.3 million associates, yet they fail to give health insurance to 54 percent of its employees."
That's sickening to me.
Remember the big to-do in the debate when John McCain accused Barack Obama of wanting to fine companies for not providing health care to their employees? THIS is EXACTLY what Obama was talking about - for political reasons, I understand why Obama didn't specifically say "I'm talking about companies like Wal-Mart", but he SHOULD have said it to drive the point home.
That's one of the many things that, over time, it became apparent to me that John McCain didn't understand. It's one of the many, many reasons I found Obama to be the superior candidate.
I had many other problems with McCain, of course.
For all the accusations of "flip-flopping" thrown at John Kerry in 2004, McCain has absolutely skated by his own obvious changes of heart in this election cycle. He would do well to remember this every time he complains about media bias. He largely got a free pass on his dramatic reversals on two key issues: abortion rights and President Bush's tax cuts. To his credit, Obama chose to dwell on his own ideas and concentrating on his own strengths, but he could have easily chosen to demonstrate via Rove-ian negative ads just how severely McCain's opinions have shifted.
McCain, on the other hand, jumped from topic to topic, whenever some relatively insignificant "controversy" was created by Drudge, or Fox News, or conservative radio. As far as I can see, though, he never really gave an adequate, clear representation of what he himself wanted to do. More often than not, he seemed content to focus on why Obama shouldn't be president rather than why he should. I think voters, to their credit, finally got sick of that, after eight years of nonsense from the usual suspects.
Bill Ayers has not been in the public eye in decades. He's a non-factor in policy in every way, shape, and form. Granted, perhaps I'm naive in as much as I was born after his involvement with the Weathermen. But to pin his actions to Obama? Weak.
Jeremiah Wright? Don't like Rev. Wright? Fine, don't vote for him for President. I voted for Barack Obama, not Rev. Wright. In fact, and I've stated this previously on this blog, I'm still waiting for a candidate to pander to ME, the secular liberal.
A side note: If there's any position on which I disagree with Sen. Obama, it's this one. While I respect his religious beliefs, he would be an even better candidate in my eyes if he were to just say, 'You know what? Religion doesn't provide our troops armor and ensure their safety. Religion doesn't fill our potholes and keep our bridges strong and safe. Religion doesn't pay off our debts.' And then just leave it alone. No religion, no religious issues. Done and done. Further, and this came up in the VP debate, is the issue of gay marriage, which Senator Biden said that he (and Obama) is against. He spoke of allowing benefits such as visitation rights to sick partners, but that's not good enough for me.
If I were a candidate, I'd say that I believed strongly in gay rights, and that a homosexual couple should be allowed to marry just as any heterosexual couple can. Tradition, schmadition. Tradition used to dicate that a dowry was exchanged when a marriage was to take place. We get along just fine with that change, don't we? Who am I - what right do I have - to say that two people who love each other and are committed to each other can't marry? It's simply not right, in my opinion.
And the argument that it "cheapens" marriage to everyone else is bullshit. If two other people getting married somehow changes the way you feel about your own spouse, perhaps you shouldn't have been married in the first place. And frankly, that would seem appropriate ... where does the 50% divorce rate come into play, as far as "tradition" is concerned?
Gay marriage: yes. I'm all for it. I'm straight, and I love my wife. My relationship is not intimidated by the relationship(s) of others.
McCain should also be questioned regarding his selection of the vacuous Sarah Palin as his running-mate.
Something about this still seems off to me ... I
wrote about this before, and I thought it seemed a little too conspiratorial then (but less so now), but I'm not sure McCain wanted her. Many others have speculated that he actually wanted to pick Joe Lieberman (who would have had the distinction of losing the Vice Presidency for two different political parties), and in retrospect he probably should have chosen Mitt Romney (who - and I say this as a former resident of Massachusetts - I still think is a fraud). I don't like him, either, but he would have given McCain a strategic advantage by having a "business guy" campaigning with him.
Why do I mention this, obvious as it is? Because the John McCain we see now is not the same John McCain the country got to know eight years ago. I liked that version, even if I disagreed with it. The current version, on the other hand, is too cranky and seemingly mean-spirited.
I can't prove this, of course, but I think McCain was sold a losing bill of goods by the controlling Republican think-tank that really didn't want him to be their candidate anyway. Meaning: Rove, Cheney, the
Project for the New American Century cabal, and others that may have gotten its claws into the current Bush administration. Fox News had branded Rudy Giuliani "America's Mayor" and seemed intent to push him as the Republican candidate succeeding George W. Bush prior to the primaries, for instance. I don't think the Republican leadership thought McCain would end up winning over the voters.
But somehow they got to McCain and convinced him that he needed to follow their blueprint to maintain the White House. McCain, who was opposed by the religious right at first (and never seemed to be much of a religious guy to begin with), suddenly started receiving endorsements from prominent religious types, which I don't think would have happened had he not started playing ball with these guys.
Again, maybe this is all crazy talk, but it seems to fit to me.
Believing that he needed their help to win, the "maverick" followed their lead. The flip-flopping started. Suddenly he was anti-abortion rights. Then Sarah Palin showed up out of nowhere. And the real mud-slinging began.
McCain never seemed comfortable with this approach to me, which is why Palin became even more prominent. The bulldog with lipstick had no reservations about what she was saying, and, in fact, seemed to enjoy throwing a good smear out there once in a while (and by once in a while, I mean every time she opens her mouth at a rally).
Another side note: I hadn't heard that amazingly offensive and insensitive Palin joke until a couple of days ago, when my good friend Bryan (who loves a good offensive joke as much as anyone) mentioned that even he couldn't repeat it on-line. And if HE couldn't repeat it, I knew it had to be pretty bad. I googled it based on his hints, and sure enough, it was just ... wow. Serious wow. And even surer than sure enough, my brother texted it to me without hesitation or regret hours later.
And no, I'm not going to repeat it here, either.
So Palin, who doesn't understand the issues well enough to have an intelligent conversation about them, became the attack dog for an uncomfortable old man whom his own party voted for but didn't really want. And the discomfort grew, and it became anger. And then their followers became uncomfortable and angry, and we all know how their campaign stops became ... uncomfortable and agry - sometimes in horrible, horrible ways.
"Vote McCain, not Hussein!"
Really? Really, that's what you're offering? That's what's going to earn you the White House? I certainly hope America is smarter than that.
And now, once again, it has resulted in people who aren't voting for McCain/Palin being called socialists, communists, traitors, treasonous, and even worse. And Sen. Obama, well, he's a secret Muslim, to boot.
The GOP and Fox News can claim all they want that it's been the same coming from the left, but it really hasn't. The left and its supporters, while hardly perfect, haven't been nearly as vitriolic or venomous as those on the right, at least as I see it. Perhaps I'm blinded by my own political persuasions, but to me, it's not even close.
But I am glad it's almost over. This stage, at least.
There will be spin in the next few days. There will be talk of voter disenfranchisement, this time from the right. There will be attempts to use "voter fraud" as an excuse for certain states' outcomes (by those who don't realize the difference between registration and actual voting - not that I condone registration fraud, either, of course). There will be more name calling and mud slinging.
But it will be over. I hope we move forward.
I also hope that Obama wins with 51% of the vote or more, and that he wins at least 325 electoral college votes. Then, it's undeniable that the country has chosen, and that the decision is fairly definitive.
In a way, oddly, I hope Obama loses Ohio, too. Ohio is home of the greatest portion of the whole ridiculous ACORN controversy. If McCain can win Ohio, he can't whine about the "fraud" issue there, and how it somehow "tainted" the national results. It diminishes that argument to nearly nothing but dust blowing in the breeze.
I don't dislike John McCain - I don't
want to dislike him, at least. A few weeks ago I reviewed the new Metallica record, and I compared Bob Rock to Grima Wormtongue.
I also offer that John McCain has been seduced by the power of the Presidency. It has become his Precious, and he has become its Gollum. Somewhere, deep inside, his Smeagol is trying to find its way back out. I hope it does, before it is destroyed. The John McCain I want to believe exists is a good and honorable man, and I certainly respect and admire his sacrifices for our country. The John McCain I've seen in the past few months, though, is a shell of that man, and that saddens me. It truly does.
I honestly think that McCain was forced into a position in which he had to say things he didn't want to say and do things he doesn't really believe in.
I also believe that Barack Obama has spoken from the heart, and believes that what he's saying, doing, and proposing is for the best of the country, and not just for himself and his party.
I hope he wins the Presidency tonight.
And if he does, I hope he understands that a lot of people like me are counting on him to keep his word.
This is about more than him, and it's about more than beating John McCain, and it's about more than fixing what George W. Bush has done. (Actually, it kind of is about fixing what George W. Bush has done, but whatever ;) )
The bottom line: no matter what the result is, I have done my part. I voted.
Did you?
