I know that there's been a lot of discussion about whether or not Barack Obama is the right candidate for president, and it seems that in general people are taking a wait-and-see approach. I would like to propose that we actually do the opposite, and push all our chips in to the middle for Obama now.
I fear that people are watching him so carefully for how he might have slighted the grassroots, or a stance he should've taken more firmly, or his electability that we're missing a chance to be intimately involved in choosing the next president. Rather than waiting around to be wooed, why shouldn't we get in on the ground level and help shape his campaign? There are several reasons why Obama is the best possible choice for this kind of early bid.
- Decency. Whatever you may say about how genuine it is, Obama is a master at projecting decency and honorability, and appears to be squeaky clean. In a country reeling from scandals, corruption and quagmire, he can shine in ways that other heavyweight candidates simply can't. Clinton has too tainted of a past and is embedded in the DLC machine, and Gore is not only associated with the Clintons, but has a hell of time projecting any charisma, let alone the glow of Clintonian (as in Bill) sympathy Obama elicits.
- Iraq. He's the only legit candidate who was involved in politics at the time (Gore doesn't count, because he wasn't a political figure at the time) who made the right call. This is huge. Hillary will have to hornswoggle her vote, and Edwards can mea culpa all he wants, but the fact remains that he was wrong and helped thousands of Iraqis and Americans to their deaths. I understand that to err is human, but Obama did not err. In the morass of Iraq, the American people will look for someone who won't get us into a similar mess. With Obama, assuming Mccain wins the Repub nom, we'll have a clear opposition of values--the surge who voted for war vs a man who's opposed it from the beginning. No mushing around with "Well, I voted based on the information at hand but then I changed my mind and then I changed my mind again and now I'm sort of for withdrawal but not so much." Obama may not have a clear solution for the Iraq problem, but nobody does. He does, however, have a clear history on the topic, and that will be a huge asset in the campaign. Not to mention having done the morally right thing, which we should value highly.
- Progressive History. However Obama has positioned himself as a senator, not taking sharp enough stands, not putting his name on defining legislation, the fact remains that his history as a state legislator is pretty rock solid progressive. The fact of the matter is that a dyed-in-the-wool progressive is not going to be our president. Maybe 20 years from now, but not in 2008. His mushiness recently will only help him in a presidential run, avoiding the compromises most senators face in a national run (Mccain will have many to fight off). Remember, George Bush ran as a compassionate conservative, and we all know how that turned out. If Obama was President, elected with a fairly moderate platform, do we really think he'd completly abandon progressive ideals? Bill Clinton won on a balance the budget, fiscally conservative, reform welfare plan and yet immediately took on gays in the military and universal health care.
- Relative Youth. However Obama has publicly positioned himself toward the netroots, at 45 years old he's closer to having grown up with the power of the internet than other campaigns. The chances of him understanding the language seem greater. This is just a guess, not based on anything solid really.
It seems to me that Obama's relative malleability on some issues should be seen as an opportunity rather than a deficit. Here's a guy who, with very energetic and commited support from the Netroots at an early stage, could not only have his tactics and idealogy influenced, but also have some debt to us. The same way conservatives worked hard for Bush despite his "compassionate conservativism" and made him beholden to them, shouldn't we buy in early? Instead of waiting around like an ancient princess for suitors to come and bring the best treasure, shouldn't we instead get out on our horses and find the treasure ourselves?
Just like poker, sometimes you've gotta go all-in when you've got something less than certain, like an Ace/King off suit. Look at the percentages, and force everyone to play your game.
Lastly, I gotta just say this. I like the guy. Period. I saw him on the Daily Show and Oprah, and I came away thinking I could hang out in a bar with him and have a good time. This means very little, except that the last time I felt that way about a candidate, it was Bill Clinton. I'm not saying it's a reason to support him, because like Clinton, you can be likeable and also slippery, but it does help one get elected. Can we really afford another stiff, but politically satisfactory candidate? Basically, we're hiring someone for a job. He's charismatic, he's personable, and on perhaps the most important moral issue of our time (Iraq), he took the right stance. Let's take the rest of his operation to the next level.