I think McCain is the only candidate to reject earmarks, which often benefits special interest spending vs. spending for the national good.

In fact, without a solid plan guaranteeing that the actual number of dollars spent by the government will decrease, I wouldn’t put faith in any candidate who wants to balance the budget. If they aren’t reducing the bottom line, they are still just counting on future income. Heading into an economic slow down, that’s just stupid.

Given that, balancing the budget is not an election issue for me because none of the candidates can possibly do it with their current plans. Therefore I like McCain’s plan the best because:

A) The government can’t spend more money without increasing the deficit, which puts pressure on them NOT to spend money if the deficit becomes a bigger election issue in the future

B) I get more money now, guaranteed, whereas Obama and Clinton’s plans mean I get less money now, guaranteed, with any benefit of a reduced deficit being purely in the realm of fantasy

I never thought I’d vote for McCain.

I’m drawn toward tax cuts in general, but I don’t understand how anybody could argue for tax cuts when we’re going massively into debt. It’s like deciding to retire after years of increasing credit card debt — it just doesn’t turn out well!

I figure the Democrats’ policies will be largely paid for through a reduction in ‘emergency’ military spending, but I’d be much happier if they proposed budget cuts to go along with their increased taxes.