There are quite a few of us here, and in the country, former Edwards supporters, folks leaning towards Kucinich (because of his program more than his actual chances), who are not particularly in love with either Hillary or Obama.
I'd like to say a few words on their behalf.
Let's start with Hillary. She looks insincere even when she is probably sincere (as Josh Marshall pointed out) and will say or do anything to get elected. Not necessarily a bad thing in a politician, but hardly likable.
As for Obama, I'm sorry to say this but he's got that kind of slick Werner Ehrard charm/charisma which totally rubs some people (myself included) the wrong way. I just don't like the guy.
Now let's look at their programs; they are not that different, and frankly, they both suck.
Let's review below the fold:
On energy, do we find anything in Obama's or Hillary's programs (I'm referring to what's written on their respective websites) that takes into account what our own Jerome à Paris or Kunstler say almost on a daily basis about peak oil and its likely consequences? No.
On health care, do their programs reflect or go towards what our own nyceve advocates? No.
On foreign policy, do their programs account for what Jerome à Paris and the good and smart folks at European Tribune write about? No.
On the economy, do their programs acknowledge what Professor Roubini or Bondad have diagnosed or are predicting -- the impending cost of bailing out the US financial system? No.
On FISA, does either Obama or Hillary have shown any leadership on the issue, à la , say, Dodd? No.
So explain to me why I should feel enthused about these two, except of course that they are both a gazillion times better than McCain (which is enough reason for me, BTW).
Now, I do understand that, in order to be elected in America, even by liberals, one must deliver the kind of delusional pablum that will not get you torn apart by the media.
In fact, Evans' defeat, Kucinich's, and on the right side of the aisle, Ron Paul's inability to get traction, are ample proof that the truth is still an electoral poison pill. To quote Jack Nicholson, present company excepted, we can't handle the truth. Point taken.
So while I sound somewhat peevish above, I don't really mind that Obama and Hillary are -- let's be blunt about it -- LYING to us in order to get elected.
In the case of Hillary, it's quite transparent, in fact. That woman would wear a monkey suit if it could get her two more votes.
Obama is more of a cypher. I'm not 100% sure if he believes his pablum or not; I just pray that he doesn't and isn't a doofus like Jimmy Carter (and I love Jimmy) and is a lot worldwise than what he seems to be. I suspect he really is. Like Werner Ehrard, those folks don't buy into their own spiel. Change, my ass.
When our next Leader to be has to deal with $5 trillion in Iraq war costs, $3 trillion in bailout costs, with the US$ likely to lose its world currency reserve, "YES WE CAN!" and 3 a.m. phone calls will be rosy fantasies best forgotten, and "CHANGE" will the bitter pill we'll all have to swallow.
So, the bottom line is, I respect both Obama and Hillary, who are both very intelligent people, and quite capable, I'm sure, and I feel comfortable voting for either one of them, but I don't particularly like either of them, and their present platforms are mostly delusional fantasies.
Not everybody loves Obama. Or Hillary. BUT THAT'S OKAY!
update: And it goes without saying, either will be a gazillion times better than Scrooge McCain.