It's been a long time since any presidential candidate has turned me on. I'm tired of saying about the Democrat, "Well, at least he's better than _____."
That sort of faint praise, which is what I'd offer Hillary Clinton or John Edwards, isn't what this country needs or deserves after putting up with eight years of George Bush.
Barack Obama is.
So New Hampshire voters, please, pretty please with an Oregon fir tree on top, give my state and the rest of the county a tremendous gift next Tuesday.
Another impressive Obama win.
I've tried to get enthusiastic about Clinton. I really have. I can do it for, oh, an hour or so. I'll hear her give a speech and like what she says.
But then the thought of her trying to win over independents and Republicans in the general election fills me with dread. Heck, she's having a tough time winning over me – a progressive with moderate leanings.
Clinton is too familiar, too predictable, too much a chip off of the old Bill block. Been there, done that. It's time for a real change.
Which is the problem I have with Edwards also. He's a political retread who still has some miles on him. But not as the Democratic presidential candidate. Vice-president? Sure. Bring him on, as Obama's running mate.
Plus, I heard his second-place "victory" speech after the Iowa caucuses. It sounded horribly old-fashioned, all that talk about his parents and grandparents working in the cotton fields, or steel mills, or wherever.
"That's nice," I kept thinking. But bashing corporate America and praising the working class isn't going to cut it come November 2008.
I'm tired of divisiveness. Much of the rest of the country is also. I don't like Bush's "you're either with us or against us" attitude. I also don't like it when Democrats or Republicans take the same polarized stance.
I just watched Obama's Iowa victory speech (transcript is here for the broadband impaired). It's easy to see why so many are so ready to get behind this guy and propel him into the White House.
You [Iowa] said the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that's consumed Washington; to end the political strategy that's been all about division and instead make it about addition - to build a coalition for change that stretches through Red States and Blue States. Because that's how we'll win in November, and that's how we'll finally meet the challenges that we face as a nation.
We are choosing hope over fear. We're choosing unity over division, and sending a powerful message that change is coming to America.
Another reason I like Obama: he's the only candidate who can say "give it up for Michelle Obama" (his wife) and not sound ridiculous.
No wonder he got the youth vote.
I am for him also and am hoping the country can see what is possible with him. Most of the points you made are what I have also been thinking; so can only say-- yeah, right on! *s*
Posted by: Rain | January 06, 2008 at 09:36 AM
I think Edwards provides a more direct and unflinching view of what will happen on the ground the day the speeches are over, but there is something to be said for the initial establishment of a common cause.
One thing I'm unclear on is how the Obama movement plans to execute their will once their man assumes the Presidency. Planning wise, is that the end goal? Obviously the President will not be running "Decide my Middle East Policy" internet votes among Obama Nation if he wins, but if it's a movement, does everyone clap and then go back to hoping we get the leadership we want?
Obama has proven that he can move a large mass of people to bear towards an honest reformation of corporate politics and economics in America, if he chooses. That is by nature a partisan fight. It is not D vs R, it is public interest vs monied interest, and the money will fight back. Hard. That's where my concern lies--will he build a genuine movement and then let his natural inclination for inclusivity prevent serious change? If he can show that he'll take his power to lead and truly will lead with it, I'll be on board. He's got all session this winter and spring to lead in the Senate. I'll be watching.
Posted by: torridjoe | January 06, 2008 at 03:03 PM
And I should say there's already common cause, as I think Edwards outlined last night--more of the Clinton era isn't really what we want to go back to, either. Wouldn't you like to see Barack and John make it a tough choice just between them as soon as possible? Her machine is a house of cards.
Posted by: torridjoe | January 06, 2008 at 03:09 PM
It's really disappointing that he came in second but he is the best candidate, the most positive and intelligent.
Posted by: Cathy | January 08, 2008 at 07:55 PM