I just want to start this out by saying I am not a political person. Honestly, I just don't pay too much attention to the minor nuances that separate political candidates. I mean, let's be honest: how much difference does it really make on most issues? I simply don't have the fiscal understanding to choose a candidate based on their political policies. I can't argue one way or another on most of the 'issues' like economy, foreign policy, and the ever-dreaded budget. That being said, however, there is one area of a candidate's platform that I do care a whole lot about: their environmental and scientific policy (big shock to everyone).
While not everyone agrees on what policies the candidates should enact, there is one thing just about everyone agrees on: Science should be a part of the policy-making (just check out the graph). Now everyone can be more informed on just that, thanks to a GREAT initiative called Science Debate 2008. If you are scientifically-minded at all you MUST take a look at what these people are doing. On their website they have a side by side comparison of each candidates responses to questions about key scientific issues and policies. It is by far the most comprehensive and informative dialogue I have found so far that tackles these issues that I hold very near and dear to my heart.
I refuse to endorse either candidate specifically in this blog - that isn't the point of this post. The point is to get people to actually research and think about each candidate's relationship to science. For the record, they aren't as far apart as most might think. Both do value scientific education, knowledge, and advances. I would summarize their answers here, but the truth is I want you to go read them for yourself. I feel that the issues addressed by the questions, polls, and goals of Science Debate 2008 are paramount, and not only do I not take them lightly, I don't want you to, either. Go read what the candidates have to say. Pay attention in the upcoming month to their positions. Make an informed decision.
Of course, Obama did claim he'd double funding for scientific research...
OK! I'm sorry. I didn't mean to push you one way or the other... but that's a lot more money to fund jobs like mine! How can I not be biased?