The Galactic Question Center

As a keeper of slaves Jefferson would most likely not have supported Obama and Palin isn't running for President so he couldn't support her. He wouldn't have recognized today's America, (an empire), so would most likely have not voted at all. McCain's evangelical supporters would have annoyed him as the antithesis of his own beliefs which were essentially humanistic for his era. He was a strong proponent of the secular state and author of the Jefferson Bible which excised all miracles, resurrections, virgin births etc leaving only the words of Jesus.
 

bob-the-(intelligence of a)-goat needs to look up the word 'empire' in a dictionary. It does not now, nor has it ever, applied to America.
 

Dear robotsyndicate:

Your level of unquestioning indoctrination is one proof of the kind of arrogant and effectively propagandized thinking which always exists among the hoi polloi at the heart of empire.

American Empire, Another of many proofs:

What follows is a direct, verbatim quote from the Executive Summary of "United States Commission on National Security/21st Century", better known as the Hart-Rudman Commission, which is a government-endorsed organization largely made up of members of the U.S. Council of Foreign Relations. The full report is the blueprint for what has now become the Department of Homeland Security. The Commission's 14 members are all Senators or Congressmen or major functionaries of Cabinet-level departments (members include Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Robert Zoellick, George Tenet, and Paul Wolfowitz). It was created by a bipartisan agreement between Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich in 1998.

In the "Summary" of a Commission report entitled "Road Map for Security: Imperative for Change", dated January 31, 2001, this quote appears: "In the new era, sharp distinctions between 'foreign' and 'domestic' no longer apply." The commission report goes on to state that the members unanimously "do believe in the centrality of strategy, and of seizing opportunities as well as confronting dangers."

Failing to seize those opportunities, the commission report continues -- and here is the "official proof" many demanded -- "The risk is not only death and destruction but also a demoralization that could undermine U.S. global leadership." (empire).
 

I am of the opinion that Thomas Jefferson would have been able to support Obama, or any free citizen deemed eligible for executive office. I believe though Jefferson seemed to have accepted slavery as the law of the land, he would likely have felt free-born blacks, once their right to vote had been affirmed by the Supreme Court, were very capable of governmental leadership. I believe Jefferson's acceptance (one might argue support) of slavery was ultimately an acceptance of economic and legal reality rather than a personal or spiritual conviction. His avid support of the work of John Locke (and Locke's tabula rasa thesis) illustrates this to my satisfaction.

Also related to this, bob-the-goat seems not to have addressed a the consideration that if Jefferson could not accept voting for a free-born black citizen, surely he could not have voted for any woman, regardless of her ancestry. Forgive my use of the pejorative, but I think in the 18th century a free-born male mulatto would trump any skirt, even a virago.

Another fallacy introduced by bob-the-goat is his dismissal of the question. Though Governor Palin was not a candidate for President, that did not prevent contemporary citizens from being her supporters in the 2008 election. If we accept that Jefferson can time travel, or otherwise provide his extratemporal opinion on the current state of a political race, surely we can accept the question on its face as a theoretical 2012 presidental race between the incumbant president of one party, and a popular public figure who has been put forth as a potential (some might say likely) theoretical candidate from a second major political party.

For my own reply to the original question: If we assume Jefferson accepts modern legal precedent, I believe he would have looked at the caliber of discourse provided by each of the two individuals. I assert that old Thom would find far more in common with the President as an Ivy-League-educated attorney with an extraordinary gift for oratory than he would with the panderingly populist and inarticulate Governor of Alaska.

I do agree with Mr. Goat that Jefferson would almost certainly take serious issue with many things our government and our modern society have adopted. In addition to the religious point he raises, our federally-funded permanent standing army would certainly alarm him, to cite just one example.

Finally, on the subject of empire: I think Mr. Goat is using the term as metalepsis, and not a literal or legal description. With only slight reservation, I think he does so appropriately.
 

bob the gota sounds like a socialist obama supporter
 

Thomas might have to roll his eyes and sigh heavily at the choice (we are certainly used to that), but he would not choose Palin.

And that's for reasons more numerous than four hundred words can encompass.
 

he would be discusted by the prospect of either, he loved freedom...