Chapman is in full riff why he’ll vote for Kerry
At the age of 50, I get few chances to try something entirely new. Come Nov. 2, I plan to take one of those rare opportunities. I’m going to vote for a Democrat for president.
I’ve never done it before, and I hope I never have to do it again. But President Bush has made an irresistible case against his own re-election. His first term has been one of the most dismal and costly failures of any presidency. His second promises to be even worse.
Funny enough–I had no idea Chapman is pro-life. Maybe I missed it, but his columns are pretty tight so all of his views don’t come out–and I’ve been reading him for 16 years probably.
I’ll take it
Kerry, it’s true, is worse than Bush on some issues. But he can probably pass a test that Bush has failed, namely, avoiding catastrophe.His presidency would also restore something valuable: divided government. Unlike Bush, Kerry would face a Congress dominated by the opposition party. As Cato Institute Executive Vice President David Boaz puts it, “Republicans wouldn’t give Kerry every bad thing he wants, and they do give Bush every bad thing he wants.”
Bad things have been the hallmark of the Bush presidency, from either a conservative or a liberal perspective. On Nov. 2, we can let him expand the grave damage he has done to the national interest–or we can hold him accountable. I’ll vote for John Kerry without high hopes or enthusiasm, but vote for him I will.
Chapman and the Cato Institute fool are both basing their hopes on what looks to be a fading hope that the Repugs can, in fact, hold on to control of Congress even after Kerry wins the presidency. I’d say they have zero chance of keeping the Senate. If a few more races like Crane/Bean and Hyde/Cegelis pop up around the country, we might be able to grab the House as well–or at least narrow the Republican margin to the point that it might as well be Democratic.
I would only point out that abortions are UP under Bush by about 52,000 over the trend of the Clinton administration.
I have never thought that newspaper endorsements did anything…but can Bush survive this ugly tied of editorial enmity?