Why this New Yorker will be voting for Obama on Tuesday, Feb. 5

[DLnyc]

I have a lot of respect for Hillary Clinton. I have seen her, as our Senator, to be an extremely bright, hard-working, passionately commited progressive who really knows how to get things done in our current political/economic/social environment. Like a lot of my friends in New York, I have also seen her disappoint the activists and progressives among us by taking 'safe' positions, presumably to protect her bid for the presidency. I could forgive that, except for one small problem:

I'm not that confident that she can win the general.

At my age (50 some), I have seen one too many bright, capable, establishment-friendly Democratic insider -- Humphrey, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry -- either go down to defeat, or win by a small margin and then have the election stolen from them.

Basically, Obama can generate the enthusiasm, commitment and grassroots activism that can lead to a large enough win that we might beat the right-wing cheat-machine. Exactly the kind of enthousiasm that was missing in the campaigns mentioned above.

Obama, Hillary or any of a number of other smart, experienced passionate Democrats would have no problem managing the presidency. The real issue is who could wake the slumbering, disillusioned, apathetic majority of the American people and inspire them to the kind of active involvement that will force radical change REGARDLESS OF WHO SITS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

I could see Obama doing that. So far I've seen Hillary come close, but I'm not convinced she can do it.

Just my point of view, but I have a hunch the NY vote later today may show that others here have a similar feeling.

[Big Blue Marble]

1. Thank you so much.

Thank you for seeing what makes him different and why we need him.

[patrioticintellect]

2. Why I don't care

Obama has yet to define change. He really makes little demands of the corporate powers that be. He is manipulating rhetoric to con people like you into liking him. Come Summer hope and change up against the fear of terrorism will be phased out of the election. Populism will become nonexistent. Obama will come to a staggering halt in his amount of support and McCain or Romney will attack him for being liberal. Obama will play their game. And at the end of the day, the voices and choices that should have been heard in this election were silenced.

So go enjoy participating in the election circus. But understand that people like me don't want to hear from you.

[countingbluecars]

3. Thank you

for this reasonable post.

[Fredda Weinberg]

4. Radical change? Sorry, that won't happen again

Nostalgia for the 60's is misplaced ... change takes place within the system and HRC has been a model politician. To choose hope over positive experience isn't irrational - it's bizarre.

[DLnyc]

6. Sorry, I disagree

1. Radical change must happen: the American Empire is collapsing, the oil economy is on a collision course with global warming and an international military/energy/propaganda machine is spiraling out of control.
2. Systems don't change themselves: people in the system are there by virtue of the system and will not, by themselves, change that system. HRC has been great at making the system work a little better. But I would say we need a complete overhaul, not a tune-up.
3. Yes, sometimes hope may seem irrational, but despair is almost always deadly, and mere pragmatism, though it may be healthy, tends to fade to apathy before much gets done.

[Fredda Weinberg]

7. Systems change themselves everyday when they have feedback

systems. Negative feedback is key to stability, so please ... let us accept change in manageable fashion, by people who plan ahead and involve others.

Nothing is spiraling anywhere. The US had rough times after the Vietnam war and it took several generations to recover. Even two terms of * hasn't permanently damaged our prospects.

The election is about hope, not despair. We don't need a candidate who appeals to us precisely because he's an empty vessel into whom we can pour our aspirations.

[DLnyc]

8. Stability has its place. Namely when things are good.

When things get bad, stability is dangerous.

Staying in the same house, in a good environment, is efficient and gives the family tradition and a sense of continuity. If a forest fire is burning in your back yard, though, 'stability' is a very bad idea: it's time to move, quickly.

" . . . change in manageable fashion, by people who plan ahead and involve others." Yes, that is a good point. Radical change has often become unmanageable and disastrous. It's not an easy call, how bad things are and how dangerous changing too fast may be.

Perhaps the difference between you and me (and please forgive me if I'm wrong in my assessment, it's just my impression) is that:
1. I see a more urgent need for deeper change than you do
and
2. I have less confidence that a 'moderate' message (and image) can win the general election.

If so, I don't say that you are wrong, just that I see it differently.

But I would make the argument that 2 terms of * HAS permanently damaged us: US credibiliy in the international areana is gone, the dollar has nowhere near the strength it had seven years ago, we've run up useless debt to a point that we may not be able to borrow in the future and global warming has gotten close to, or perhaps past, an unmanageable tipping point.

In short, I don't think a small movement back toward the left is enough now. I'm sure others disagree. I wasn't necessarily trying to convince, more just trying to explain my point of view.

[Fredda Weinberg]

9. I hope it's a difference of perspective. In an emergency, following

a planned escape route is preferable to desperate action, no matter how frantic.

As for elections, I've seen too many where a moderate sounding Republican prevails over a standard bearer for our party. HRC has purposefully position herself in the center and McCain will have trouble competing for Commander in Chief, which is the slogan in his latest ads.

I'm delighted that we can see things differently, agreeably. I may not be able to relieve your current anxieties, but in the long run, hopefully you'll see the same signs of progress I perceive.

[Jane Austin]

5. That is very well said!

Thanks.

[TexasObserver]

10. Another lucid, reasoned response for someone who likes Obama.

We can hope others may experience a lucid interval before they vote.