Today, Democrats (and independents, and even a few Republicans) will have the opportunity to vote in primaries for their candidate for President. I’ve already endorsed Barack Obama previously, but that was just a quick one-off of me more or less saying “yes, I like him.” I figured I should be more comprehensive.
So.
Firstly, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: my personal preferences aside, Hillary Clinton would make at least a good President, and just possibly a very good one. I am sure she would do the job well enough, and getting Bill Clinton in the bargain as an unofficial advisor is no small deal. As a candidate, however, Hillary Clinton is, bluntly, terrible. It doesn’t matter how intelligent and capable and even charming she is; she comes into the presidential election with slightly less than half of the electorate utterly unwilling to vote for her.
Is this fair? Of course not. Hillary Clinton’s demonization by the right wing has never been even remotely fair. But likewise, it wasn’t fair that Al Gore got tarred as a serial liar in 2000 when he wasn’t in fact lying. It wasn’t fair that John Kerry got demonized for his military service. It wasn’t fair that an otherwise clever, personable wonk was given the nigh-unelectable name of “Paul Tsongas.” Politics is many things, but it is not fair.
But even if Hillary Clinton did not carry with her this baggage, Barack Obama would still be the choice. I feel the need to illustrate my point thusly: the overwhelming feeling of all us foreigners towards America right now as regards Obama can most accurately be described as jealousy. Great statesmen are rarities in any nation; we all mostly make do with capable technocrats and charming rascals, and for the most part this is good enough. But every so often a nation gets a truly amazing leader, someone all the other countries look at and wonder “why can’t our leaders be like that” – a Churchill, a de Gaulle, a Trudeau, a Mandela.
Am I saying Barack Obama is one such? Not necessarily. But more than any leader I can remember seeing since Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama exemplifies the promise of greatness. He has shown he is willing to speak plain truths. (A friend of mine watched last Thursday’s debate with me, and his jaw dropped when he heard Obama bluntly name an attack question on illegal immigration the scapegoating that it was. “Does he want to lose the election?” he asked me, not realizing that if anything, Obama’s answer probably won it for him.)
Critics of Obama often lash out at his tendency for rhetoric, but rhetoric is only a crime where specificity is missing, and Obama has nothing if not a powerful understanding of policy. (I won’t pretend to agree with him on health care mandates, but ultimately he and I agree on the necessity of universal health care coverage, and he has displayed in his political career an admirable tendency to use what works. Everything else is dross.)
Moreover, though, what irritates me is the charge that Obama is instilling the electorate with unreasonable expectations, that causing people to believe that simply electing the right man can turn everything around. Do these people not read history? Franklin D. Roosevelt was the one man of his time; so was Mikhail Gorbachev. Give one man enough power and he can change the world for the better or the worse – we know this. So I assume those who level this accusation believe Obama incapable of living up to such expectations.
True, maybe he can’t do it. But – and I say this wholly convinced of the truth of it – unlike any presidential candidate in at least the last twenty years, he’s got a shot. Say that to yourself, again: in dark times (and these are very dark times, don’t think otherwise for a second), there is at least one presidential candidate who can be better, and who more importantly inspires other people to believe they can be better, and if they believe they can be better, they will usually try to be better. I’m sure you can appreciate the ripple effect at work.
There is nothing criminal in trying to appeal to what Lincoln called “the better angels of our natures.” It is, at root, how politics should work.
So, please – vote for Barack Obama. Prove to the rest of the world that America can still do something that is holy-shit stupendous. Believe me, we all want to see you do it, very badly indeed.
Related Articles
9 users responded in this post
I live in New York, and will be headed out to vote for Obama this afternoon. I spent a long time feeling unsure about which candidate was the best choice. But a lot of what I’ve read on your site helped me make up my mind. (Though the final piece of the puzzle, what cemented it for me for good, was this video.)
This mixture of feeling optimistic because there is a candidate in the field who might ACTUALLY be an amazing leader, and the anxiety of the possibility that Democrats will, once again, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, is sheer torture. Seriously.
[…] Today Mighty God King tackles Super Tuesday, and I’m buying what he’s selling. As a candidate, however, Hillary Clinton is, bluntly, terrible. It doesn’t matter how intelligent and capable and even charming she is; she comes into the presidential election with slightly less than half of the electorate utterly unwilling to vote for her. [source] […]
Voted last week in the primary (we do early voting as an option here), and yeah, had to go for Obama. Of course, if I’m still living in Utah come November, it won’t matter…
I love my presidential vote being absolutely worthless thanks to the electoral college! IT IS TEH AWESOMEST THING EVAR!
Ironically, I get a decent say in the primary, but what can you do? Aside from petition to change.
Thanks.
I don’t get to vote today but I’ll be caucusing on Saturday. I’m excited to vote for the first time in a long time.
I voted for Obama this morning, from sunny California.
Just got in from voting. I live, or rather, exist, in the Deep South, so if you hear about Obama actually getting a single vote down here, well, that would be me.
I normally vote along conservative lines, but I’m voting for Obama today. There was a repeat of a talking head show this weekend in which Dennis Miller, in a interview from June of last year, said the reason liberal talk radio’s audience is only a fraction of conservative talk radio’s audience is because liberal talk radio in the U.S. sounds pessimistic. I think that explains a big part of Obama’s popularity and enthusiasm among voters; they see him as the first viable liberal candidate in a long time because he conveys an attitude of real optimism. He’s also the first genuine 21st century candidate, and a lot of people are hoping his generation will mark an end to the toxic boomer politics of both left and right.
I don’t agree much with his political positions — Bush wiretapping public phone lines to stop the eeeeevil terrorists is uberscary doomness, but house-to-house searches to stop the eeeeevil guns and mandatory mental health screenings to stop the eeeeevil veterans matches constitutional protections perfectly? — but at least he doesn’t give the same “actor” feeling that a lot of other politicos do.
“Give one man enough power and he can change the world for the better or the worse – we know this. So I assume those who level this accusation believe Obama incapable of living up to such expectations.
True, maybe he can’t do it. But – and I say this wholly convinced of the truth of it – unlike any presidential candidate in at least the last twenty years, he’s got a shot.”
What if he gets that power, but ends up sending us in a bad direction? Then it’ll be unfortunate that he’s charismatic. Like Reagan. I’m just sayin’.