• On MovieTome: See the TRAILER for TERMINATOR 4!
May 22, 2008 6:05 AM PDT

Who is better for tech: McCain or Obama?

A long time ago - I think it was 1995 - I was seated at a long dinner table in a rather nice home in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Around the table were all the officers and directors of Cyrix - the microprocessor company that was later acquired by National Semiconductor.

One of our directors was Jack Kemp, quarterback and politician extraordinaire. Jack, who can really work a room, eventually turned the conversation to politics. The question put to the table was whom did we like in the upcoming Republican primaries and why.

I instantly panicked. I didn't even know who the candidates were. I wasn't a Democrat; I just didn't care much about politics. Back then, my opinion of political candidates was based solely on the effect they would have on my taxes.

Thankfully, the inquisition went the long way around the table. By the time it got to me, I was able to fudge a pretty good answer.

I'm more politically astute these days - which isn't saying much - but I'm still not sure if it matters to the technology industry who wins the upcoming presidential election.

(Credit: Greg Sandoval/Declan McCullagh/News.com)

A March phone survey of 600 technology employees had Obama and McCain tied.

I also checked out the CNET Technology Voters' Guide, which had Barack Obama's and John McCain's answers to a questionnaire. There was some good content regarding specific issues there, but it wasn't what I wanted to know.

All I care about is our nation's ability to compete in an increasingly global world economy. To be more specific, these are the top three technology-related political issues I'm interested in:

1. Protecting the intellectual property rights of U.S. companies overseas;
2. Helping to improve the competitiveness of U.S. companies overseas; and
3. Helping to prepare our children for an increasingly competitive and global marketplace.

Sure, there are other issues, but I think they pale in comparison to these three.

So I ask you - the ever-knowledgeable and opinionated CNET reader - which candidate will be better for our nation's global competitiveness? Or, if you think there are bigger issues, please enlighten us.

Note: the first part of this post is based on a story originally published here.

Steve Tobak is managing partner of Invisor Consulting LLC. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Recent posts from Train Wreck
Wonder why everything isn't speech controlled?
Survey links CEO approval to stock performance
Making sense of reorgs
Meetings suck, but they don't have to
Far out technology for the geek in all of us
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 4 comments
by dsherr1 May 23, 2008 11:46 AM PDT
Whichever candidate can engender the greatest trust internationally will be best for the US well being, this oil addiction notwithstanding. Trust builds confidence. Confidence builds security.

On the Middle East:
Obama: I listen to may points of view even though I support the status quo.
McCain: It is a long-term conflict.

Imagine if Moses had made a right turn after crossing the Red Sea.
Reply to this comment
by dsherr1 May 23, 2008 11:48 AM PDT
Whichever candidate can engender the greatest trust internationally will be best for the US well being, this oil addiction notwithstanding. Trust builds confidence. Confidence builds security.

On the Middle East:
Obama: I listen to may points of view even though I support the status quo.
McCain: It is a long-term conflict.

Imagine if Moses had made a right turn after crossing the Red Sea.
Reply to this comment
by johnferguson May 24, 2008 8:10 AM PDT
If you think Bush has been good for America, vote for George W. McCain. Personally, I'm ready for a change.
Reply to this comment
by The_Decider May 27, 2008 7:11 AM PDT
I really don't care for a president whose main focus will be to put more money into the pockets of obscenely rich people and companies. People decry the idea of the "nanny state" when talking about using tax dollars to help the people but have no problem sinking billions only to help the rich and the corporations. This is a very twisted mindset and proof how utterly screwed the US is. Why should a corporation have a security blanket from the US government when the majority of the people are one misfortune away from total financial devastation? In other words your first two items are totally out of order, the last one is directly related to real improvements in education and the only valid point you made.
Reply to this comment
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
Resource center from CNET News sponsors
Business. Ready.
Sony VAIO® Professional PCs.

Click Here!
A new grade in mobility demands a new kind of notebook. And Sony delivers.Tough, portable and featuring up to 7.5 hours of battery life, VAIO® Professional notebooks are built for business. Learn more.

Click Here!
Built tough for business.

Learn more about the rigorous quality testing Sony puts its notebooks through.

Protect your investment.

Find out why VAIO® tech support recently won a Laptop Editors' Choice Award, July 2008.

Long battery life.

See how VAIO® PCs will keep you productive longer when on the road.

Travel light

Check out our ultraportable line-up, starting at 2.87 lbs.

PCs for every need.

Find out which VAIO® notebook is right for you.

About Train Wreck

Steve Tobak is a marketing consultant and former chip industry executive. Train Wreck provides insight into dysfunctional corporate behavior, among other things. When he's not airing the industry's dirty laundry, Steve likes to hang around the house, make believe he's working, and drive his wife crazy. Find out more at www.invisor.net or email Steve at trainwreck@invisor.net. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Train Wreck topics

Featured blogs

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right