I read a fascinating article in Time about how McCain and Obama gamble. On the heels of Obama’s successful convention and McCain’s first major governing decision - picking a Vice President - it’s worth reviewing :

On McCain’s passion for high-stakes craps

McCain’s passion for gambling and taking other risks has never been a secret… “Enjoying craps opens up a window on a central thread constant in John’s life,” says John Weaver, McCain’s former chief strategist, who followed him to many a casino. “Taking a chance, playing against the odds.” Aides say McCain tends to play for a few thousand dollars at a time… Only recently have McCain’s aides urged him to pull back from the pastime. In the heat of the G.O.P. primary fight last spring, he announced on a visit to the Vegas Strip that he was going to the casino floor. When his aides stopped him, fearing a public relations disaster, McCain suggested that they ask the casino to take a craps table to a private room, a high-roller privilege McCain had indulged in before. His aides, with alarm bells ringing, refused again, according to two accounts of the discussion.

“He clearly knows that this is on the borderline of what is acceptable for him to be doing,” says a Republican who has watched McCain play. “And he just sort of revels in it.”

On Obama’s use of poker to “vent his competitive urge”

But he [Obama] always had his head in the game. The stakes were low enough — $1 ante and $3 top raise — to afford a long shot. Not Obama. He studied the cards as closely as he would an eleventh-hour amendment to a bill. The odds were religion to him. Only rarely did he bluff. “He had a pretty good idea about what his chances were,” says Denny Jacobs, a former state senator from East Moline… Obama’s risk-averse, methodical approach to five-card stud gives Link confidence in his potential governing style. “If he runs his presidency the way he plays poker, I’ll sleep good at night,” he says.

Comparing the two candidates

[T]here is no bigger gamble than a presidential run, which both candidates have conducted very differently this cycle. McCain’s campaign, like his life, has been marked by its embrace of living dangerously and by clear runs of fortune and disappointment. Obama, meanwhile, has succeeded, no less remarkably, by diligently executing a premeditated strategy.

McCain indulged in his craving for high-stakes, all-in gambling again today with the selection of Sarah Palin, a woman who will be next in line for leading our nation behind a 73 year old man with a history of cancer. He chose to nominate a rising GOP star with less than two years actual governing experience and only a stint as mayor of a 9000 person town in Alaska; someone with no experience on a national stage and with nothing but an average joe working knowledge of anything related to Iraq or any other foreign policy issues; someone he’d only met in person once and who was a last minute pick (a regular, non-VP speaking slot speech she’d written for her GOP convention appearance was just approved this last week, according to NPR this morning). His selection of Palin may be surprising, but his method is not.

As I mentioned in my post yesterday, reinforced by the Time article description and in contrast today’s selection, no matter what the stakes — large or small — Obama has always played the long game, the tactical game, the game of biding time and massaging the field of play until you’ve created the odds that favor your bets. He drives his oppenents crazy and he wins frequently.

Obama: Cool-headed, tactical, careful, deadly, precise, not revealing his hand, content to wait until the time is right, low-risk and high-yield.

McCain: Impulsive, hot-headed, driven by passion, hit-and-miss, imprecise, wearing his craving on his sleeve, all-in, unknown results.

A simple question for every voter:

In a time of growing uncertainty, complex threats and enormous challenges after 8 years of rashly considered actions and disastrous consequences, which man sounds like a person you’d most trust to lead America?