I may be stating the obvious here but sometimes it is worth doing. Whatever weaknesses that may comeout about Obama, or strengths about McCain, people seem to be weighing it against their dread that the next 8 years might be like the Bush years. They see Obama making the most drastic change, 180 degrees from the current direction, and they assume that the MOST change is the BEST change. McCain certainly represents change from Bush, but it is a less drastic change, more like 90 degrees fromt he current direction.
I think it is distorting people’s perceptions to let fear drive their thinking this way. If I am driving and can’t find my destination, it doesn’t necessarily mean that turning around completely (180degrees) from the wrong direction I am going is the best choice. It does mean that I have to make some change, but going backwards doesn’t give me new info to help me reorient. I am looking at the same landscape for a second time. If I go right or left (90 degrees), I am looking at a new landscape, and new info may help me to get on the right track to my destination.
Back in 1976, we went in reverse and elected Jimmy Carter. Good man, good in foreign policy, but bad President domestically. We reacted in fear to Watergate, even though Ford not Nixon was the Republican nominee. We thought more of a change would mean a better change.
We got the big change in 1976. But were we better off?
Will we be better off with Obama, just because he is promising and will likely deliver the most dramatic change?