To judge by Barack Obama's disappointing performance so far in the opinion polls, reflected in the surprisingly subdued atmosphere at the Denver convention, Democrats are suffering a bad case of “buyer's remorse”.
This distressing psychological syndrome, precipitated by the purchase of a superficially attractive, but unaffordably expensive or inadequately researched consumer item, could only have been intensified by the impressive performances of Hillary and Bill Clinton, which dominated all other events in Denver this week.
It is still possible, of course, that a virtuoso rhetorical display tonight by Senator Obama will galvanise not only his 70,000 adoring fans at the Denver Invesco Stadium, but the US electorate. It is just as likely, however, that any displays of mass hysteria tonight will put off large numbers of voters and feed Republican mockery about “Obamamania”.
If this week's convention fails to achieve the widely predicted take-off in Mr Obama's ratings, does this mean that the presidential election is all but over before it started and that the world must prepare for another four years of Republican rule? The answer is an emphatic “no”.
The Democrats' Byzantine nominating procedures and their introverted ideas about electoral “fairness” have led them to choose the less electable of their two main candidates. As a result, they have blown the chance of turning the disaster of the Bush presidency into a Roosevelt-style electoral landslide. It is tempting to conclude that the Democrats have again thrown away an easily winnable election. Tempting, but not yet right.
It is too early to write off the Democrats, despite the poor start to their campaigning, because as polling day approaches, voters will realise that this election is not about the Democrats or Mr Obama or his relationship with the Clintons. It is about the Republicans and John McCain and his relationship with George Bush.
The maxim that “oppositions do not win elections; governments lose them” is not just a journalistic cliché. It is a profound statement about democracy. Since nobody can predict the future, it is impossible for voters to base their judgments on whether a future government will be successful or an untested candidate will make a good president.
Manifestos are rarely worth the paper they are written on. This is not just because politicians are dishonest but because unexpected events intervene. Dealing with the unexpected is a much more important function of government than implementing manifestos. Some politicians who seem well prepared and have clear policy objectives, such as Gordon Brown or Richard Nixon, turn out to be hopeless leaders, while others with little experience and few policy positions, such as Ronald Reagan or Tony Blair, end up being successful. Democracy is largely a gamble about who might govern best; and the right to vote is little more than a right to roll the dice.
Why then, do millions of people the world over fight for this right? Because the most important function of democracy is not to choose good governments but to throw out bad ones. It is the right to eject bad governments that prevents tyranny, makes government serve the people, discourages corruption and keeps most democratic nations at peace most of the time.
The corollary of this observation is that politicians must always live in fear of punishment by the voters. But if voters repeatedly fail to punish incompetence or corruption or gross misjudgment, then the fear of defeat is lifted and democracy loses its disciplining power. And a country in which the dominant parties can afford to scoff at the discipline of the ballot box, is the point when democracy starts to slide into self-perpetuating oligarchy.
If the Republicans can get their candidate re-elected to the White House after all their failures of the past eight years - after the military misadventures, the geopolitical blunders, the economic mishaps and the mismanagement of natural disasters - America will be perilously close to the point when democracy ceases to perform its most essential function of disciplining political power.
It may be objected, of course, that the incompetence and misdeeds of George W. Bush should have no bearing on whether John McCain should become president. This, indeed, seems to be the basis of Senator McCain's strategy, which has emphasised his disagreements with President Bush. But even if it were not for the many similarities between the Bush and McCain platforms - aggressive militarism, contempt for international opinion, social conservatism, tax cuts for the richest voters, dogmatic faith in market forces even when, as in energy or housing, they have obviously failed - a Republican win in November would be an affront to American democracy for a deeper reason.
Whether or not Mr McCain would continue the policies of President Bush (and much of the evidence suggests that his would be a Bush presidency on steroids), he would keep in power the coalition of interests that the Republican Party represents: the energy and military-industrial lobbies, the religious conservatives, the anti-environment interests and the neoconservative think-tanks. These groups - which have gained enormous influence, both financially and intellectually, under President Bush - are as responsible for the blunders of the Bush Administration as Mr Bush himself, arguably more so, given the President's notorious lack of interest in the details of any of his own policies.
If a Republican is again elected president, these same centres of power will continue to dominate Washington. However many wars they encouraged, however high the price of oil rose, however many tax dollars were redistributed in their favour, the neoconservatives and Pentagon contractors and religious fundamentalists and oil and Wall Street lobbies would conclude that there would be no political price to pay for failure. They would be justified in concluding that there is no longer any democratic check on their ambitions.
It is only by ejecting the Republicans from the White House that American voters can send the message that they are still in charge of their country and that gross government incompetence will not go unpunished. Accountability - not personality or rhetoric or colour or age or gender - should be the overriding issue in this election. The Democrats - with their naively high-minded focus on Mr Obama's alleged achievements instead of the Bush Administration's manifest blunders - do not yet seem to have understood this. But with luck, American voters will prove less naive than the Democratic high command.
I was a McCain supporter before I started reading this article, and an Obama supporter after I have finished.
Andrew, London, UK
The right wingers in America are walking contradictions. They despise socialism when it helps their neighbor down the street or in the next town but they love it when the government they love to hate uses socialism to bail out the Wall Street Capitalists from their greedy follies and bad gambles.
Bill, San Jose, USA
It is the New York Times and it's biased companies that Americans are kicking. No - we are not biased (they say). We are just totally in LOVE with Obama - the guy who wants to turn our public schools into Communist indoctrination centers with his good pal Bill Ayres. Obama will lose. So will the NYT
David J, Mount Dora, Fl, USA
American voters are, once again, about to disappoint the European elites. How sad. But it is all for your good. How else would you be able to maintain your sense of intellectual and moral superiority? So cheer up. You have four more years of meaningful dinner party chat ahead.
Joet, New York, USA
Yeah, I don't know if those in the UK can grasp the nuance of American politics.
We have 49-50% of the voting public who are only comfortable with any old man who can utter the words "I am pro-choice, anti-immigrant and pro-gun", even if he's selling the country to China behind their backs.
Franklin, Hartford, CT, USA
A year and a half ago I would have agreed with you heartily. However, today Iraq looks like a victory and the Democratic Congress is even worse than its Republican predecessor. The Republicans did deserve repudiation but they have redeemed themselves with the surge. McCain will win.
Charles Oltorf, Austin, USA
What negative GOP Americans. I voted for Bush twice. His administration has ruined our economy and standing in the world, not to mention Iraq. McCain, yuck. Lets be honest, GOP, get therapy, a major makeover & rid of the evangelical zealots. Obama is a breath of fresh air. EU, pray for us.
kat, Sacramento, USA
Raised in rural Upstate NY, I was always taught the virtues of small government. This includes keeping the government out of our wallets, our doctors offices, and our bedrooms. My choices?A fiscal conservative with scary social policies or a friendly socialist who will spend us into oblivion.
Greg, Philadelphia, PA, USA
The US learned appeasement to Radical Muslims as demonstrated by President Jimmy Carter does not work. If he had of handled that problem correctly we would not have the problems with them today. Obama following in Carters footsteps would be a disaster. You had better hope that McCain wins.
bill, Fort Worth, USA
Yeah, a person who barely graduated the naval academy, who crashed more jets than fingers in his hand, and whose only achievement in life seems to have been captured for the enemy would make a great president!!!
The capacity for denial and masochism by the American right never ceases to amaze me...
Frank Tierney, San Francisco, CA, USA
for Vivian in Canada, and others who agree with Mr. Kaletsky. Vivian, I don't care how high your expenses go up, that is what you get with socialism! Exactly why I don't want "the Messiah" getting elected president here. I live in Florida, the economy is doing well, life is good.
Ken, jacksonville, usa
Anyone who can call Obama a "socialist" or a "liberal" is so far to the right that they can't even remember what the centre looked like.
Ben, Motreal,
Mr Kaletsky, the Western world is faced with a choice between the near communist nanny state that crushes the will to work with excessive taxes and cripples the ability to compete with excessive regulation.
The USA would be well advised to avoid Blair and Brown's socialist the train wreck.
Paul Clieu, Parker, CO, USA
The right to punish bad government may be a vital tenet of democracy, but it is wholly wrong to assume that this is all that voters think of.
Even though it makes far less sense than voting out a failing party, people will continue to opt for the president they want to run the country.
Rob, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Just so all of you anti-socialists know, America is what you call a 'mixed economy.' There are aspects of both socialism and capitalism in our economy, and until you understand that, you're going to sound deservedly ignorant.
Who builds your roads, puts you through school, and polices your towns?
Eric, Laguna Niguel, CA, USA
I'm not disappointed by Baracks polling. He is ahead, and he is black! The Rs got their shots in, our powder is dry. I wish to complain about the rude R bloggers who "pose" as Democrats. They are easy to spot, they sound mentally challenged like most R voters. Rush Limbaugh has encouraged them.
Brian Sumpter, Sacramento, USA
Lovely article, and the people who call Obama a socialist have got to be delusional. He is a centrist with left-leaning tendencies. He's not even close to being a socialist, but that word has such a stigma surrounding it here in the states that conservatives love to use it to brand Democrats. Silly.
Eric, Laguna Niguel, CA, USA
McCain will get all the hesitant republicans except some religious rightists. Obama will get all the dems who held out for Hillary. It'll be another tight race decided on emotion, not reason. My money is still on Obama because McCain reversed himself on everything that matters.
Mike, Pittsburgh,
"He is a socialist and should be running for a europeon country - not the USA.".
Look what capitalism, the private banks of USA has done, gave money to penniless to buy homes and sold the worthless contracts to banks outside their shores. The Fed used good old socialism to bail them out!
simon, Manchester, UK
Gee, thanks so much for the orders on what we "must" do in our election.
I'll be sure to keep that in mind when I vote.
Right up there with the orders I regularly get from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on how I must think about my country.
Jeff Adams, Coupeville, Washington, USA
I may dislike some of what Mr Bush has done, but that doesn't inspire me to vote for a candidate (or party) who emits foggy vagueness, or worse, spouts utter nonsense. Voters are beginning to see through O'Bama's shallow rhetoric. To use a Bush-ism, I think you "misunderestimate" John McCain.
David S, Boulder County, CO, USA
Republicans will win in Nov. People will realize Obama is all show & no go. You can't run a country with the idea to buy everyone a Coke.
George, Fla., USA
The wish that Americans should give the Republican a kicking is ridiculous. They have commited blunders such as being socially conservative and having faith in market forces. How ridiculous & dumb!
What is truly ridiculous is Obama sitting is a church pew as Jeremiah Wright disparaged America.
augustin , haslett, usa
A fine example of left-wing chattering-class delusion. On the most important issue they faced, Iraq, McCain advocated the "surge" which has won the war, Obama argued against it, and still continues to claim it was a bad idea.
Gareth, Cardiff, Wales
"he would keep in power the coalition of interests that the Republican Party represents: the energy and military-industrial lobbies, the religious conservatives, the anti-environment interests and the neoconservative think-tanks".
That is Bush's THIRD TERM! The democrats are right!
gary_smoth, LONDON, UK
Obamas speech tonight on the "ben hur" rock star stadium set up will be interesting. His Berlin speech seemed pompous, absurd and he lost ground there. He is a socialist and should be running for a europeon country - not the USA. don't beleive the hype Bush is not disliked as much as media suggests.
greg, wrightsville bch NC, USA
I suggest that Brits, in particular, stop complaining about the U.S. making a mess of Iraq. Getrude Bell, British spy, diplomat, and cartographer, drew the boundaries thinking that the new-born state could achieve great things. Whitehall dropped the ball. And Democrats would have done so as well.
JBM, III, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Wow, only 62 comments so far, majority of them pro-Mccain. Well, there's millions of Americans who aren't pro-Mccain or pro-Bush. Yeah, we'll see what happens in November, and it ain't going to be a happy occasion for the Republicans!
Ann, Pasadena, CA,
The Republicans have served special interests for too long. Neo conservatist ideals have brought the normal working man to his knees unable to afford a comfortable way of living. They masquerade behind family values and a good moral base, all lies of course, but it seems they are believed.
Jon, Belfast,
The article would be better if it had remembered that the present US government is largely in the hands of Democrats. The last year and a half of ineptitude has nothing to do with George Bush.
George Ismael, Rosamond, USA
I agree that the Republicans did really badly under George Bush. However, McCain is much more experienced than Bush and is a much more principled person. While the Democrats should be able to win this election, there is no need to gift it to an unsuitable candidate merely because of his colour.
Andre, Portland, USA
As an American I only ask two things from a president:
-be willing to defend the interests of the USA
-don't tax me to death to support the government-dependency class
I have doubts that Obama will do point #1, and his socialist policies wil impact my retirement and kid's college plans...
Frank , Dove Canyon, CA/USA
A McCain win will not mean that American "democracy ceases to perform its most essential function of disciplining political power." As it currently stands, voters are very likely to help the Democrats expand their majorities in both the House and Senate.
Matthew, Pennsylvania,
My rent just went up 5%, my heat bill 23% and my groceries 10-30%. I can't pay, yet I earn good money next to some. Despite this happening everywhere, several people here have called a center right candidate like Obama a socialist! Are there thinking people left on planet earth?
Vivian, Vancouver, Canada
So throw out the party in power regardless of what the alternative is.... Excellent advice as it completely obviates the need for independent thought. Thank you so much for saving me the trouble. FYI Reagan was a 2 term governor of one of the largest states - hardly inexperienced.
Steven Tish, Norwood, NJ, USA
John, Surfside
We elected a female prime minister 35 years ago. The Americans haven't been able to even nominate one to run for office.
Our horse is higher than yours.
A Brit in New York
Kay, New York, USA
In 1890 an Indian visionary toured the reservations, preaching that if the Sioux danced the Ghost Dance the buffalo would come back and everything would be as it had been. Americans who fear where the 21st century is taking the USA will dance the Ghost Dance by voting for McCain. There are plenty.
Jack Cerf, Chatham, NJ, USA
Shane, London
When you lot elect a black Prime Minister, then you can mount your morally shaky high-horse. And in case you left-wing kooks haven't realized it, Bush is not running.
John, Surfside, UNITED sTATES
To Brits commenting negatively about the US, I can only imagine that you visited Florida, California, or the North East US, so are experts on America.. (or you listen to BBC...)
I am British and live in Alabama. Until you live/visit outside of those places, you will have no idea about US politics.
Andrew, Huntsville, Alabama, USA
The Republicans didn't just fund Al Quaida, but also armed Sadam Hussain so that he could fight Iran. In addition they overthrew a democratically elected Government in Chile and aided repression and torture. They didn't worry about his reputation for civil rights then. They do love to lecture other
Harold Lloyd, Basingstoke, england
America to vote for a black candidate? You are joking of course.
Shane, London,
Lets ban Americans who haven't understood the article from commenting. Anatole is right that democracy itself is at stake in this election. I'm conservative, and like McCain, but if he wins so do incompetence, corruption and special interests. The party must pay for Bush - the rest of the world has.
Peter , Belfast,
Tend to agree, but what will happen is McCain will get in, USA will continue spending its way into budget deficit hell and the USD will collapse. Global economic regression to the mean. No amount of cheerleading can stop that now. The next president will be a one term wonder. Its a poisioned chalice
chris, prague,
Beware the Tom Bradley effect!
Kenneth M. Ayers, Raleigh, NC, USA
Anatole, you're wrong about Nixon - unlike Brown, he wasn't a "hopeless leader"; he was a very effective American president and world leader until Watergate unravelled his presidency . Like Brown though, he was graceless and awkward, and his smile and his face were never in the same room together.
Sean Hunter, Glasgow,
Here's the ad slogan that would win it for Obama: "Give George Bush a big thumbs up! Say well done on 8 years good work... vote McCain!" OPverlaid on pictures of a grinning Bush...
Dave, Columbus, USA
An interesting declaration that builds to eloquence. Seeming at first cynical about democracy, it is drastically realistic. I think Kaletsky is right. As (some) Americans say, Throw the bums out!
Let's do it.
Ernest W,., Trumansburg, USA
Tony Blair successful? Depends on how you define success I guess. Politically, yes I suppose three comprehensive election victories constitutes success. Has he left the country a better place than he found it? The Iraq disaster, the education shambles and impending economic run answers that question
Oliver Tonkin, London, UK
If we can't say anthing about Obama because we will be branded racists then this is racism in reverse. Sod it. I will be racist!
ian cheese, london, uk
Does Anatole Kaletsky approve of the Obama stand on trade protectionism in order to appease American trade unions?
Surely, if the Senate and House are in Democratic hands, it would be no bad thing to have an independent-minded president in the White House?
Morven Hay, London, UK
Your first piece of strongly perceptive thought for a while, Mr Kaletsky. Back on track!
A few more of these geopolitical pieces please.
Kind regards,
Mark
ps. Corollary? Did you do The Times spelling test too?
Mark, London, UK
All of you miss the point. It may be politcally incorrect, but the "red" states "ain't" going to vote for the "black guy" plain and simple. He's gotten a free ride in the press here because you can't say anything against him or your labeled racist!
Murph, Madisonville, Kentucky
The Republicans in the US are like the Tories here, because they favour tax cuts for the rich and powerful. This means that the country's media, staffed by the rich are supporters of the right-wing parties and don't hold them to account. Hence Osborne and Cameron get away with murder here.
Airey Nees, Basingstoke, england
Excellent piece, Mr. Kaletsky. The line, 'the most important function of democracy is not to choose good governments but to throw out bad ones' is spot on. Let us hope that, for the good of the planet, another bad one is unceremoniously thrown out. My guess is that it will be.
Conor, Edinburgh, Scotland
Will there be Independent observers present in Texas and Florida to make sure that the Polls are fair and Democratic. After the fiasco of 2000 where the US was as bad as Zimbabwe for vote-rigging and let Bush steal the Election the UN should be supervising the vote.
Harold Lloyd, Basingstoke, england
Our job is to pick the better of the two candidates, that's all. Most of our domestic problems are a result of a Democratic Congress, not Bush. Bush is an awful leader, but voting against another Republican to teach Bush a lesson is insane. McCain isn't great, but Obama would be worse.
lawhite, Idaho, USA
Is it not interesting that befor the IRAQ war, polls in the UK showed that the vast majority (70-80%) of respondents were in favour of kicking Saddam out. No wonder Blair and Parliament voted the way they did. But political memories are very short!
M. Cawdery, Portadown, Co. UK, EU
Stan, USA - "Obama want to massively increase taxes"
This is the usual Repub propaganda - Obama wants to increase taxes on the super-rich, and lower taxes wherever possible for everybody else. The tax burden on the poor would be reduced, which is how it should be.
Owen, London, UK
Who is best placed to deal with the challenges of the future and in particular the rise of the authoritarian bloc - Russia, China etc. ? My gut feeling is that McCain is better equipped, but Obama is still a wonderful role model.
Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK
On the contrary, it's the Democrats who deserve a kicking. Given Bush's unpopularity they assumed that they could forget electability and choose a candidate for ideological reasons. This arrogant approach failed the Conservatives in the Blair years, and it stands a good chance of failing now.
Pauline Renton, Camberley, UK
"Do you think the Amercian people are that stupid?"
Some obviously are if they believe its the democrat led senate that is to blame for not stopping Bush.. because its all the republicans doing, they've done a record number of filibusters and relied on Bush to Veto anything that gets through
MK, AU,
Obama is a socialist! Americans don't want a socialist. It took 20 years to recover from Carter. We have the 2nd highest corp. tax in the world. With Obama we would have the highest. No corp. would want to have a headquaters here. The govt doesn't need to think for me. I can think on my own.
Sandra , Santa Barbara, CA, USA
The election is about the future, who is the best choice for the leader going forward ?
Obama is totally unqualified, not ready yet.
Obama want to massively increase taxes and introduce schemes of "rebates" to those deemed 'deserving'.
Sound familiar ? We know how well that works, eh ?
Stan(expat for now), USA, Usa
So many of us seem to have forgotten the perilous global economic situation post 9.11. Europe and Japan were near recession and China and India hadn't really started their surge. All today's woes are better than what would probably have happened if the U.S. hadn't reduced interest rates.
Mark Jackson, Scottsdale, AZ, U.S.
"Sorry to tell you Limeys, but Bush isn't hated as much as you think. "
Really? so you are all happy with a leader who ruined your economy, lied to everyone to start a War and proceeded to do a terrible job of it.. couldn't even catch Osama.. etc etc?
Kind of setting the bar low aren't you?
MK, AU,
I'm a Republican even if a kangaroo is the candidate. But in McCane we have a candidate both of whose parents are Americans of pedigree consistent with traditional American values, an Annapolis graduated Naval Officer, a Naval Aviator. a Prisoner of War, a Senator, and a charning wife. Lucky Us!
Payne, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
Oh Lord, do these Eurogeeks never learn? Please, oh please, spread this article, and subsequent ones, as far and wide as possible in the U.S..
Perhaps you can make phone calls to closely contested states on Obama's behalf as well? Then, McCain would carry more states than Reagan in '84.
James Griffin, Washington, D.C.,
Both candidates represent the continue decline of the US. It has not stopped with either of them.
ed , toronto, ontario
Only someone who is not an American could have penned this balderdash. Just to refresh your memory: Bush will not be on the ballot. Americans actually vote for the people who are on the ballot. And the vote for individuals, not parties.
Frank Wilson, Philadelphia , USA
I am a Democrat, but vengeance is not what I want from this election.
Susan P. Widdowson, Atlanta Georgia,
You missed a few things: No terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11. Afghanistan and Iraq liberated. Gruesome dictators killed and others cowed. Al-Qaeda decimated. Taliban gone. I think many people think Bush has done just fine and will not really find it so difficult to vote for McCain.
Steven, London, UK
Don't panic Anatole, in the end McCain will be toast. The economy is in such shambles that the Republicans will take a licking in both Houses of congress as well. That's the danger: no more gridlock!
William Thomson, Guildford, UK
Conservatism is on the rise again in America - thankfully...
Like many elections before this one, the liberal media have flase started again... bla bla bla comes to mind when hearing the rhetoric on the BBC or CNN.
History will judge Bush to be a great president - which he is!!
Michael, Motsput Park, London
The Democratic party chose an inexperienced and liberal candidate during these times of world chaos and threats of war, not to mention, the Democratic Congress with an approval rating LOWER than Bush. Do you think the Amercian people are that stupid?
Shane, Houston, USA
Zordana has it right. It is not a matter of Democrat vs. Republican but who is better qualified. Mr. Obama still has no background and what is shown is vague. "Community Organizer"? Sounds like a party hostess to me rather than a presidential candidate.
Harvey Nichols, Newport RI, USA
Sorry to tell you Limeys, but Bush isn't hated as much as you think. The reason for his low numbers have more to do with his govt spending than foreign policy. Frankly, he's not conservative or hawkish enough. This is still a center-right country and we will never go down the path of Marxism.
Richi Rich, Washington DC, USA
Obama is toast. Not only will he not be elected to the presidency, Republicans will regain some congressional seats on McCain's coattails. Obama is NOT in tune with Main Street America. His only legislative accomplishment has been to block the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, the Illinois Senate
Gerry, Bangor, Maine, USA
The outcome is predictable: there will be an overwhelmingly democratic, and non-incumbent congress elected, and a republican president. Americans like their congress full of pork, and their president to have somewhat conservative values, at least verbally.
Sujeenda, London,
bloated government programs, higher taxes, bankrupt social security, embracing evil dictators. Who could ever vote for the Dems? They've failed on every account. Public education, another liberal disaster. The list goes on and on. Bush and Co. have failed, but not beacuse they are conservatives.
clayton, LA,
You are falling for the same trap that the Dem's did when they ran Kerry. You are conviced that Americans hate Bush but it's only the Left who hate him.
Bush isn't running for anything. People know this so it's a very Lefty against a moderate. American doesn't do Lefty.
linda, seattle, usa
Many people are in for a surprise! I recommend you quietly lean back in your chairs and watch. Unless putin pulls the trigger, which seems more and more likely. If that happens, where would it be best to be? I wonder.
Paul, Albuquerque, USA
Yes Saddam was a bad man, but that never seemed to stop the US from doing business with him when they wanted his help against Iran. Did they care about the Kurds then?
Paul Lynch, Kobe, Japan
Look Anatole old chap, you run your country your way, and we'll run ours our way. Bush is far from perfect, but the majority of folks in this country have no desire to embrace the type of socialist ideals you Brits have. The Democrats have yet to understand that. Cheerio!
Iggy, ypsilanti, usa
You are so right. Sadam Hussein was a good man who never used poison gas against the Kurds or Iranians and the United Nations resolutions he ignored were bogus. The rise of China and India had no effect on oil consumprion or its price and the Democrat controlled Congress is blameless.
Greg Suhr, Fishers, Indiana, USA
Mr. Kaletsky, you completely miss the substance of American democracy. It is far more personal at least in terms of the Presidency. 2008 is a unique year in that there is no continuity of either a sitting Prez or VP running for Prez for the first time since 1952. It's a clean slate.
richard, Sarasota, USA
The irony is that the logic of this is that independent politicians (contrary to the article this include McCain) should never break with their party on policies the don't agree with. They won't get any credit form critics like Kaletsky and will have to deal with party back lach.
David, Menlo Park, CA, USA
It is the person that counts, not the party. The US is not Britain. McCain will be an outstading president. The World needs him.
Andras, London, UK
BRAVO!
Murray Polner, GT. Neck, NY, USA
Not to defend the Bush Administration but there is an equally frightening proposition to be considered - complete legislative and executive control for the Democratic Party which has managed to plunge an already unpopular congress to a history record low of 18%. Neither party deserves power.
John Swaine, Malta, Malta
funniest is the American people thinking republicans might make them safer internationally. Al Qaeda was financed and trained into existence by right wing funding of terrorists against USSR. They then treated US invasion of the middle east the same as they had their rival superpower. What a surprise
Dave, Baltimore,
So a rabid liberal is the answer, i dont think so? Punish Bush fine, but don't punish the America people by inflicting this gruesome twosome on them.
They are so reminiscent of the Blairs that i wouldn't wish that on the US or anyone else. They will destroy America as Blair destroyed this country.
Zordana, Bucks, England