Well, unexpectedly, Edwards has for all intents and purposes dropped out of the Democratic primary ahead of super-duper Tuesday. This comment sums it up: “Tough to Run Against Two Celebrities…He was running against Yesterday’s Phenomenon, Hillary and Today’s Phenomenon, Barack. John was a great candidate but not a rock star.” But he left his mark very distinctly on this race - to be honest, I think one of the biggest marks, about standing up for the little guy.
This means that on the Democratic side, we are definitely poised for making history. Either a woman or an African-American will become our nominee, with a great shot at the presidency. I’ve already made my serious reservations about Clinton known, how I can’t honestly believe her newly formed “populist” message after years of neoliberal policies and giving in to corporations. I think this election is about populism versus kleptocracy, and I just don’t buy Clinton. She is of an older political generation, one that adopted some of the rhetoric of the economic rightwing in order to survive the political atmosphere of the day. Maybe she’s wised up from her husband’s tenure, but I don’t see that in her more recent voting record. And her tendency to want to “out-tough” the hawkish bullhorn of the Republicans, while understandable (as the first woman with a serious chance at becoming Commander-in-Chief), is abhorrent to me. We’ve had enough of tough talk.
Although I remain still a little skeptical of the shine and shimmer of Barak Obama, I’ll admit…the Ted Kennedy endorsement threw me. Normally, I pay little heed to endorsements. But to have such an institution as Senator Kennedy endorse the phenom rising star - after having worked for a few years with him in the Senate - well, that’s intriguing. I respect what Senator Kennedy has done for just-folks in the Senate during his storied career, and it makes me wonder if maybe there’s hidden substance to that dazzling style of Obama’s. Certainly Obama is a smart, thinking man, regardless of his charisma and charm.
Perhaps all the media comparisons of Obama with JFK are a lot less fanciful than I’ve been thinking.
Glancing through Obama’s issues pages, I know that I am not in agreement with 100% of his proposals. Paul Krugman has criticized his health care plan for not including an individual mandate (though, while I love Paul, I’m not sure I agree with him, as the Mass reform plan screwed a lot of middle class people with the penalties, those neither rich enough to just pay out, nor poor enough to get subsidies). But certainly the general consensus is that Obama’s health care plan doesn’t go as far as either Clinton’s or Edwards.
Then there was the accusations that Obama supports Reaganomics, a meme that the Clintons pounced on as did Paul Krugman. The Clintons, in particular, made political hay with it (to score points with the base, of course) actually misquoting Obama. However, all Obama was pointing out, in context, was that during the previous decades, Democrats had lapsed in being the leaders with ideas, and the Republicans won on having them (except I-feel-your-pain Bill, who adopted several of theirs anyway, like welfare reform). This is another form of the same argument that I’ve made plenty of times…that given a choice between Republican, and Republican Lite, we’ve seen the voters go for the real deal. Good ideas or not!
Though Obama lists it first on his economic page, I don’t subscribe to more immediate tax cuts for anyone, even the middle class (we can’t afford it). It is more important to get the budget deficit under control than to cut taxes right now. Clinton has similar ideas. I also don’t see anything about restoring sanity to our progressive taxation system, which rewards work by taxing the “money making money” effect at a higher rate than the middle or lower classes. Now, I’m not advocating a 90% top tax rate, but I think the pendulum has swung too far towards the wrong end. And I don’t think it would be a bad idea to say it.
However, there’s nothing to suggest that Obama will continue Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, and he talks about better trade deals with worker and environmental protections. Clinton, on the other hand, while she mentions that “trade policy must raise our standard of living, and they must have strong protections for workers and the environment,” she was married to the guy who embraced unrestricted “Free Trade” too completely, and I see no evidence she really learned from that. She does spend a long time on a “retraining” plan for workers who lose jobs overseas. Great, until those jobs also head overseas. Leaving us with…say…minimum wage retail jobs.
The biggest question that I’ve had to answer, to feel comfortable with an Obama vote, is…is he a real progressive? After months of hearing his speeches about unity and reaching out to the other side, I wasn’t too sure…but Kennedy and his family seem to be. Obama’s voting record is. The Clintons certainly have been trying to convince us he is not, attacking him where he’s strong with that crucial base, telling us he’s really a hidden Reagan Democrat…but from where I sit, if anyone is a Reagan Democrat, it would be Hillary Clinton. Recent changing of stripes notwithstanding.
So, the time has come. To actually make a decision. And if change and a little optimism is what we need - and I do believe that after 30 years of Capitulation Democrats, we certainly could use a new crop of leaders - count me down for another Obama vote come this Tuesday, February 5th, in the Massachusetts Democratic primary.
