Why I Am Voting For Obama

I should preface this by stating that I am 22 years of age and I voted for Obama in 2008 at 18 years of age. I recognise therefore that my relative lack of political experience/knowledge opens me up to much criticism. The fact that I will be in Europe for at least one year of the next president's term (if not longer), as I was during a year of Obama's (first) term, is also open to criticism. Nevertheless, it is important to me that I vote and that I give my humble opinion, and I will be proud to cast my vote for Obama from France.

So, why am I voting for Barack Hussein Obama instead of Mitt Romney or a third party candidate? Here is the CliffNotes version...

He has had a number of accomplishments during his four years in office of which any president would be proud. He certainly has not been the greatest president, but he has been far from a terrible president, and he has done his best given a very difficult economic and social situation.

Has he been the "Great Messiah" some were expecting? Has he been a crazy leftist communist nutcase? No, and anyone who thought he would be either of those was just not paying attention to him on the campaign trail. He has been (more or less) the president he said he would be, a pragmatic and relatively centrist chief executive who has tried to reach out to both sides of the aisle despite extreme opposition.

Has he kept all of his campaign promises? No, and he's definitely been more active with his policy-making and whatnot around election times than he has been on average. But let's not pretend that Mitt Romney would be any better.

Do we know what Obama's true thoughts are, or what his real motivations are? No, but we certainly have a better idea of what to expect from him than we do of Mitt Romney, the great "flip-flopper." Despite his relative longevity in politics and business, no one really knows what to expect from him, and perhaps he himself doesn't even know. I should add that flip-flopping is not per se a bad thing. I respect someone who is willing to change with the times and adapt their opinions to new insights. But it's pretty clear that's not why Mitt Romney has changed positions on so many issues so many times. He is an opportunist, plain and simple.

Once again, Obama is far from perfect, but a true liberal choice is never going to happen. Honestly, if the United States had a viable Socialist Party with a real chance of winning (as does much of Europe), I would be more likely to vote for their candidate, but that's just not the reality. And between Obama and Romney, there's really no contest between the two. I am hesitant to use the term "lesser of two evils," as I don't consider Obama an "evil," however you get the idea.

I have seen the argument that there is no real difference between the two, but I have trouble believing that.
Particularly in regard to the social issues, the two are quite easy to distinguish (as for the economic issues, I am a little less sure). Could you imagine Mitt Romney signing the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act? Or the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (Video)? Whom do you think would be more willing to set effective climate policy, or work to protect women's reproductive rights?

And, yes, the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") is far from perfect. I don't know that it's the solution anyone wanted, but it's a real step toward solving some very serious problems with our nation's health care system, a system that is the most expensive in the world yet yields relatively poor results. Romney has tried to distance himself from the similar "Romneycare" system in Massachusetts, and is likely to turn back the clock on any health reforms passed thus far.

Finally, and perhaps most important in the long run (imho), is the effect this election will have on the composition of the Supreme Court. As I've discussed in a previous post, the tendency in recent decades has been for Democratic presidents to nominate moderate to left justices, while Republican presidents have tended toward naming more conservative justices. Because 4 of the 5 most conservative justices of the last 80 years are currently sitting on the Court, and as many as three justices may retire in the next four years (Ginsburg, Scalia, and Thomas), this election will be crucial in determining the balance of the Roberts Court. Although I like to believe in the concept of blind justice and Robert's "referee" metaphor, the reality is that justices' legal theories tend to mesh with the political beliefs of the presidents who nominate them. I should also add of course Obama's background in Constitutional Law.

I'll end this post with a corny (and old) little joke: Just like when you drive a car, shifting the gear into "D" will move you forward, while the "R" will move you backward.

-Steven