The Democratic Race

I've taken my time deciding which Democrat I support. This passage from an excellent post (on an excellent blog, Edge of the American West) accurately reflects why I prefer Obama, but would support Hillary and John Edwards too.

It gets harder to remain neutral on Hillary.

January 25, 2008
by ari

Until now, I’ve done my very best not to pass judgement on Hillary Clinton. And I’m still trying. I really (strain) am. But it’s getting harder every day.

On the one hand, I lurve the idea of a woman in the White House. Is that stupid? I don’t know. And I don’t care. People decide to vote for a candidate for any number of unknown and irrational reasons. That I relish the thought of my sons growing up in a country in which a woman demonstrably can be president hardly seems like the worst one on such a varied list. Plus, everything from this primary season suggests to me that Hillary is highly skilled, incredibly smart, and likely not to destroy the nation. At least not on purpose. And on top of all of that, the misogyny that underlies so much of the anti-Hillary coverage drives me right into her arms.

On the other hand, I believe that the country badly needs change. Now. As I suggested a long time ago — back when this blog was just emerging from the primordial ooze — no matter what Paul Krugman claims, I don’t see Hillary as anything like the change candidate in this race. Why? Because you can’t be for change if you represent stasis. Hillary, I’m afraid, is the very embodiment of Democratic stasis: the same stale cultural debates that I trace back to the Vietnam era; a deep indebtedness to monied interests; and a stake in her husband’s policies — both for better and for worse — as well as, in some cases, those of the seated president. Unless I’m missing something, there’s not much change there...