Obama or Clinton?

Great Debates
1

I think it’s safe, at this point, to rule out the possibility of any of the other Dem canididates getting the nomination. So – Obama or Clinton? Make your case.

I incline to Obama because:

  1. He’s just a little bit further to the left.

  2. He represents Generation X (my generation); HRC represents the Boomers.

  3. Breaking the racial glass ceiling in American politics is less inevitable, therefore more important, than breaking the sexual glass ceiling.

  4. HRC, for no good reason, is the most widely and fervently hated person in America. Those who hate her are yet in a minority, but they will turn out to vote against her, and those on the left do not much love her.

2

I feel OK about them both. Obama makes me a bit nervous because he has yet to really be through a full-scale right-wing shitstorm. Clinton makes me a bit nervous because her enemies seem irrationally opposed to her. In fact, I think that Hillary is the personage that makes me understand what in the Sam Hill conservatives are talking about when they speak of “Bush Derangement Syndrome”. I feel that way about her detractors, generally.

In the end, I come down on Obama’s side. I think he will be wise in his appointment of staff and cabinet. I think he is a good person, and he genuinely cares for the welfare of the people he represents. These two are also true of Hillary, as far as I am concerned. But I believe that he has the rhetorical and inspirational power to get things done. That is where Hillary falls short for me.

This is an embarrassment of riches compared to the last democratic primary. The only person that I would vote for over the two front-runners is Edwards (yeah), or perhaps Al Gore as he is right now, unblemished by his old uninspiring persona. But I feel lucky to have such a difficult decision to make.

3

The cynic in me says it doesn’t matter.

Gawd, I hate to regurgitate a campaign meme…of the two, I believe that Obama offers a better chance of “change”. The non-cynical part of me hopes that change, for the good, is possible. Silly me.

4

I would be happy with either one. My candidate was/is Edwards, but it’s looking less and less likely that he will be the nominee.

The only thing about Hillary is that she is so divisive that if she is the nominee, there will be people who come out to vote for the GOP candidate simply because they hate Hillary.

I would be happy with either of the two. They would both be better than what we’ve got now.

5

I’ve been asking myself this same question and I have about 5 days to figure it out before the primary.

Clinton obviously knows her shit, and she would get stuff done. She’s probably corrupt, but I doubt she’d do anything policy-wise that I disagreed with. I really like her idea of creating a ‘‘green industry’’ to deal with global warming and using people’s self-centered business ambitions to the advantage of the ailing planet. She knows the ins and outs of policy-making and has a clear-cut plan to getting the country out of this hellhole known as the Bush administration. She might be sort of questionable as a person, but she would be a good president.

Obama, on the other hand…

I wish to scoop Obama up in a butterfly net and take him home with me to give me inspirational speeches all day and all night long. I’ve been excited about his existence since I learned about it way before he started running. This is a man who spent his life doing community organization and working as a civil rights attorney. He wears his heart on his sleeve and he knows where America hurts–he is incredibly intelligent, charismatic, and sincere about his desire to unite people on opposite ends of the political spectrum. I freakin’ LOVE that about him. I want to have like 10,000 of Obama’s babies.

While I suspect Hillary would be a good president, I feel like Obama could be revolutionary.

However, given his limited experience, Obama is a much greater risk. He doesn’t know politics quite the same way Hillary does… I feel his ability to actually get work done is more in question than Hillary’s. His take on the issues does seem to be more vague–Hillary’s got the blueprints, Obama’s got the passion.

But I think I am still going to vote for him anyway. Because my heart says I should, and because I have never seen anybody hated the way Hillary is hated. She has a history. She is inextricably tied to Bill and people really hated him too. I think that there’s a good chance with Hillary vs. McCain that people would show up to vote against Hillary, as you said. I think because Obama is fresh, pretty much spotless in terms of integrity, and incredibly charismatic, he has a much higher chance of winning the general election. He is an incredibly persuasive individual, and I could see him easily putting that to use in the White House.

And I want to believe, with all my heart, that he is about everything he claims to be about. I think he is a risk worth taking. I figure no matter what happens–even if McCain gets elected–shit is going to change in Washington for the better. So it doesn’t seem as high stakes as the last election did.

I haven’t even gotten around to checking out McCain’s platform yet. I am super fucking liberal so the odds are slim that I’d want to vote for him, but as an independent I’m serious when I say I consider all the candidates equally.

I’d say there’s a 90% chance I’m voting for Obama, but if Hillary wins the primary she will get my vote in the general election.

ETA:

[QUOTE=stol]
This is an embarrassment of riches compared to the last democratic primary. The only person that I would vote for over the two front-runners is Edwards (yeah), or perhaps Al Gore as he is right now, unblemished by his old uninspiring persona. But I feel lucky to have such a difficult decision to make.
[/QUOTE]

I agree completely. It’s a cool situation to be in.

6

My candidate of preference was Edwards. Obama is my second choice, largely because he would be such a sharp change for America and would do a lot to undermine all the damage that Bush has done to our image. I don’t think he has enough experience to be chief executive, though.

Andrew Sullivan (who I normally don’t like) had a piece in the Atlantic Monthly that didn’t entirely suck:
“Obama’s candidacy in this sense is a potentially transformational one. Unlike any of the other candidates, he could take America—finally—past the debilitating, self-perpetuating family quarrel of the Baby Boom generation that has long engulfed all of us. So much has happened in America in the past seven years, let alone the past 40, that we can be forgiven for focusing on the present and the immediate future. But it is only when you take several large steps back into the long past that the full logic of an Obama presidency stares directly—and uncomfortably—at you.”

and

"Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can. "

The article is a good read, but requires subsription

I will not under any circumstances vote for Clinton. I’m tired of legacy presidencies and I’m tired of safe bet pandering without conviction. I don’t want an amendment banning flag burning and I don’t want a president who pretends she wants one to satisfy the mob.

7

Reza Aslan has a pretty pungent retort to Sullivan’s piece on Obama.

8

[QUOTE=olivesmarch4th]
I’ve been asking myself this same question and I have about 5 days to figure it out before the primary.

[/QUOTE]

Let me make this easy for you. Obama (and Edwards) is not on the ballot in Michigan. You have no serious choice to make at all !

9

[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman]
Let me make this easy for you. Obama (and Edwards) is not on the ballot in Michigan. You have no serious choice to make at all !
[/QUOTE]

It’s the principle of the thing, I say! Practice for some magical time in the distant future when I can actually vote in the primaries for real.

10

I’d prefer to see Obama because I trust him more. I disagree with plenty of his positions, like the carbon emission cap and trade idea, but I have a much better idea of what he’ll actually do as a president.

I think HRC will have a much more aggressive foreign policy stance than Obama (she’s even said as much, one of the few positions she actually takes a stand on) and is likely to do a lot of damage to the economy with a push for universal health care.

It’s surprising to me that people consider Obama the more “left” of the two. In what way is he more left than HRC? Except when it comes to foreign policy, he seems much more moderate in domestic areas.

11

The article linked above encapsulates my preference for HRC perfectly: experience (practical, even if not in equivalent official capacities), cynicism (which I think will help in international affairs, unfortunate as that is), and (not mentioned in the article) an effective former president lying next to her. The downside is just if she can get elected or not, because as has been stated she sure is divisive as hell. But I expect Obama and everyone else to campaign for her if she gets the nomination.

A Clinton/Obama ticket would be interesting, though I wouldn’t have expected that she’d want him before but now that his ability to pull votes and cross over to Repubs has been demonstrated, maybe she would after all.

Obama is eloquent and inspirational, but he’s completed precisely one term in the Senate. Come on now.

12

IMHO the whole, better vote for Obama because Hillary is so decisive that all the bigots in the world will come out of the woodwork and vote against her to be just pure BS.

I too would like to see a Hillary/Obama ticket.

Obama is my age, and I know I’m not ready to be Prez. I don’t think he’s seasoned enough, and frankly I’m reminded of well meaning Carter but not necessarily the person with the maturity to be a tough SOB when needed.

13

[QUOTE=China Guy]
IMHO the whole, better vote for Obama because Hillary is so decisive that all the bigots in the world will come out of the woodwork and vote against her to be just pure BS.

[/QUOTE]

But why is it BS? I know plenty of people who have voted Democrat in the past that wouldn’t vote for that woman if someone held a loaded shotgun to their head… not because of where she stands on the issues, but because of her association with Bill. I’m not sure that it has to do with any kind of systematic bigotry rather than just plain hating her as a human being. My mother believes they stayed married for purely political reasons, which may be, but unlike her, I don’t think that’s really important. To some people though, it is important. Isn’t that somewhat relevant to her odds of getting the general election?

14

The right thing seemed to be research into both. I am surprised to have reversed my preference. Obama seems unctuous in his speeches and lacking substance in his writing. Clinton has some depth to her thought and her own views and does not seem at all the charmless winter queen she is made out to be.

She may even have a better chance of victory. At the very least she is an experienced campaigner and has been doing the groundwork for this election for far longer that Obama. So the practical and principle reasons favour her, although as noted elsewhere prospective voters are spoilt for choice. In any other election a candidate of Edward’s calibre would be a front runner.

15

[QUOTE=Mosier]
I’d prefer to see Obama because I trust him more. I disagree with plenty of his positions, like the carbon emission cap and trade idea, but I have a much better idea of what he’ll actually do as a president.
[/QUOTE]

FWIW, all the major democratic candidates, including Hillary, support cap-and-trade.

16

[QUOTE=9thFloor]
Obama is eloquent and inspirational, but he’s completed precisely one term in the Senate. Come on now.
[/QUOTE]

Hillary has one term plus one year. And what has Michelle Obama done? Whatever it was, Barack should be able to claim credit for it too.

17

[QUOTE=China Guy]
IMHO the whole, better vote for Obama because Hillary is so decisive that all the bigots in the world will come out of the woodwork and vote against her to be just pure BS.
[/quote]

I’m interested in knowing why you think this is pure BS.

It seems to me that a lot of Hillary supporters underestimate the amount of hate a significant chunk of the populace has for her. Now maybe I’m overestimating it, but I really don’t think so. Observe on this board when someone criticizes Bush, the Pavlovian response is “but Clinton got a blowjob!”. For 8 years we have seen this happen. Conservatives, even if they have grown to dislike Bush, resent when Bill Clinton is pointed to as an example of a good president. “Why can’t George be more like Bill?” The feelings are much like those seen in sibling rivalry.

Do yall not think portends poorly on HRC’s electability? I do.

I also think of it in this way. In 2004, I was one of the people who thought Kerry could not lose. Bush was fucking up and he had lost a lot of support. The nation was ready to bail out of Iraq and make some changes. Michael Moore had put out a scathing movie. Bush was looking dumber and dumber everyday. How could Kerry not win, I wondered? But guess what? He lost. He wasn’t the most charismatic chap in the world, but he still had a lot on his side. But he lost.

I don’t see how Hillary, in spite of all her strengths, has a chance if Kerry managed to lose against Bush. Kerry didn’t have HRC’s baggage. He had the advantage of being a white male. He wasn’t connected to Bill Clinton (like HRC is), no dirt came out about his marriage or sexual proclivities (HRC is still taking heat for not crying enough about Lewinsky), no nasty rumors made headway about his sexuality (like all strong women, HRC has to deal with those too) and his big scandal (the Swiftboat Vet stuff) at worst, made him look politically ambitious and opportunistic…but not corrupt (like Whitewater does to Hillary).

So if Kerry managed to lose to one of the least popular presidents we’ve ever seen, how can Hillary supporters be so confident that she can take the White House? To me, it doesn’t matter how good she can do the job, if she can’t get the job. At this stage, the latter strikes me as more practical concern than the former.

If she gets nominated, I will of course support her.

18

In this thread I have asked (to little response sadly enough) what was more of what made the great presidents effective in their roles: previous executive experience or their ability to inspire and to communicate a positive vision for America’s future. I have my conclusion.

The greats have been great because they knew how to use the bully pulpit. They have hired smart advisors and good managers and knew how to listen to them critically. But their greatness was directly due to their ability to get America and the world to listen and to aspire to greatness themselves.

Clinton is less bad than I thought she was and she’d be a fine president. A bit more hawkish than I’d like but I could live with that. There is no chance that she’d be a great president. She does not inspire us to greatness.

Obama knows how to use the bully pulpit and then some. His vision is a positive one. He has a great team of intelligent advisors who have past experience managing the executive branch (many out of Bill Clinton’s administration). He’d be no less than fine and has the potential for greatness.

My choice is clear.

19

[QUOTE=olivesmarch4th]
I’ve been asking myself this same question and I have about 5 days to figure it out before the primary.

Clinton obviously knows her shit, and she would get stuff done.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, she’s on the ballot in Michigan and Obama isn’t.

For someone from Michigan I would ask you this. Who listens to Michigan and respects their wishes. Who challenged Michigan democrats for their decision to push up the primary? Who accepted their decision?

Candidates always claim they listen to the people. In Michigan the choice is clear, and Obama has demonstrated that he made a big mistake here that he must regret. Thankfully this mistake will not affect national security.

20

It actually does tell you something but not what you are claiming Flying Dutchman. I find it interesting that you find that trying to pander is what defines listening.