A lot of people are going to be disappointed by Obama. They expect him to make change. And he will: but it will not be done in the manner they expect, and it will not be the sort of change they are thinking of. Obama has the capacity to be both greater and smaller than people's expectations of him.
First, there will be the many people on the left who project their desires onto Obama and think he is one of them. We saw this before with Howard Dean. Those of us who live in Vermont were amazed when determinedly centrist Governor Dean burst upon the national scene as some sort of progressive hero. Part of that may be due to the fact that "center" here in Vermont means "liberal" most other places. But Dean's instincts, like Obama's, are those of a highly successful community organizer. He activates the mass of people to identify and seek their own interests. He never gets too far ahead of them. We see this in Obama's FISA vote, his rejection of gay marriage, his choice of Rahm Emmanuel. These aren't aberrations.
So Obama isn't going to change our politics by inaugurating a new era of progressive government, although I expect he certainly will be open to progressive viewpoints. His ability to appear progressive stems from his seriousness. He takes politics seriously. Not as some team sport, or strategic game, or exercise in ego and aggrandizement, but as an activity having to do with real people and their lives. To the extent that liberal ideas coincide with a pragmatic approach to social progress, he will be open to them. But many progressives will be disappointed, as we already have been, when he declines to stand with us on what we see as matters of principle.
The contrast between McCain and Obama was most instructive not for their ideological positions but for how they approached the practice of politics. McCain was all about ego (how great I am; look at my years of service and sacrifice), the empty gesture (I shall suspend my campaign and devote myself to your problems), and gamesmanship (la belle Sarah).
Obama, on the other hand, was all about leading by example. Calm when the situation demanded it, but never surrendering his humanity for the sake of presenting a facade. Showing how to counter distortion and calumny by standing firm against them without engaging in them. Never pretending to be "above the fray" as Kerry and Gore so disastrously did, but fighting on his own terms of honor and respect. Ignoring all calls to be intemperate, impulsive, aggressive, he remained passionate, steady, and assertive.
This, I think, is the meaning of what Obama says when he talks about changing our politics. Our minds jump all too easily to things like cleaning up corruption, telling the truth, avoiding hypocricy. Those are good things, of course, but I think Obama is gong beyond that. He is demanding that our national politics be conducted in a manner befitting mature, honorable adults, cognizant that people live and die by their decisions. He is demanding this in the only way he has the power to do so, by showing how it is done, with the confidence that this example will be powerful enough to compel others to follow. It is a form of satyagraha, the Gandhian theory that we make political change by forcing our opponents into positions where they cannot avoid their better selves.
I wish him the best of luck with it. I don't expect to agree with him all the time. I don't expect him to turn Congress into an engine for the common good, or do more for capitalism than rescue it from its excesses and enforce some measure of humanity on it, or drive all the petty fascists and opportunists out of town, or end the culture wars by crushing the religious right, or bring the full measure of justice I would like to see visited upon the Bush administration's criminals and malefactors. But it is already good to have a president who not only speaks in complete sentences and pronounces the words correctly, but behaves like a mensch. If that is the biggest change Obama brings, it is enough.