"Washington Post for Obama"
Given the Post‘s record, it’s hardly shocking to see their editorial board endorse Barack Obama. Still, I do find it at least a little surprising in light of the direction the page has gone under Fred Hiatt’s leadership over the past several years. The Post has become quite hawkish, very friendly to the neo-Hooverite approach to an economic downturn, hostile to Social Security, etc. They also have progressive positions on many issues, but I would have thought that divided government would be an appealing scenario for the page especially since they hold John McCain in such high esteem (“There are few public figures we have respected more over the years than Sen. John McCain”) and have seemed quite wary of progressive approaches to national security. This blog, at any rate, doesn’t endorse candidates but I did think that this is a judicious take on the “four more years” issue:
A McCain presidency would not equal four more years, but outside of his inner circle, Mr. McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought us to our current state.
I think that’s a good way of getting at the problem with the “I’m not George Bush” argument. McCain isn’t George Bush, but you can’t run an administration based on yourself and a half dozen people you trust. There are literally thousands of presidential appointees and a McCain administration would, inevitably, be stocked from the same pool of conservative movement personnel as have been running the country for eight years already.