As for everyone else, the conventional wisdom is that Hillary can't win. I wonder about that, but it's a valid point. I'm not sure that Obama will be as attractive to independents and Republicans as all that and I am suspicious that the Republicans are so prematurely anxious to eliminate Hillary. As soon as Obama wins, they are going to be going after him on experience and saying what worries me: he spent most of his time in the Senate campaigning, while Hillary sat on some of the most powerful committees.

Stockboy: I don't see the Iraq issue quite as unambiguously as most Dems, and I feel that she has a more realistic grasp on foreign relations than any contender in the race, so even when I don't “like” her votes, I trust her to know what she's doing. I don't even hold it against her that she voted for the war.

I'm not sure at this juncture what the right thing to do there is or what we should do about Iran. I am amazed at all the Democrats who do apparently know. Apparently they are privy to information that I've missed. The situation, as always, seems complex to me, and unfortunately it's like the hotel California: you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

But I may be wrong. I don't pretend to know. I trust Hillary to do the politic thing, which is what I ask from a president. I trust Obama to do the popular thing, which is NOT what I want.

As for whether he has a more open or more progressive mind, he seems far less progressive to me than she does, but this may be illusion. I am going by aspects of his platform. End of the day, I don't know either one as a person well enough to assess. But I do feel I “know”—and very much like—Hillary Clinton.
]
What I'd really like would be a clinton/obama ticket, but if I can't have that, obama/edwards.

I live E of BF Egypt in OR, nowhere, small town – no really a small town and I am on first name basis with a bunch of the movers and shakers in politics in this state. I get listened to and sometimes I even get important changes made. That happens because I participate, I spend time, effort, some money and a whole lot of listening on the game. Our state party set up a fall back position when our State Leg started talking about jumping order, and then we talked them out of it. We've built a relationship that lets us flex a little muscle, a little. But we covered our butts and our voter's butts. We didn't decide that our voters could go hang because we're sooooo important.

DNC did everything including kiss your butt, what they didn't do was tell you that you OWN the Democratic Party, and that's how that one goes. I am sorry as all get out that you personally got screwed, but if you felt that strongly about it, there were alternatives and you were only left out by YOUR own choice. County Party active membership is probably less than 0.5% of registered Democrats in any county, think how few of you could have made your voices count…

Well, I think using that criteria Obama is the hands down winner (and I love this blog where we all come up with different answers, each valid! I enjoyed reading your posting and it's very interesting. I hope are able to take something away from my thoughts as I did from yours).

I used to consider Hillary my number two choice (behind Obama) but I no longer will vote for her and here's why: the Iran Revolutionary Guard vote came up and Hillary voted for it! Obama didn't vote but was against it. At any rate, I saw the same Bush game being played- Bush was putting the pieces in place to go to war with Iran and Hillary gave bush what he wanted (just like she did with Iraq, which I forgave her for). Now don't get me wrong, I think Iran is a threat but we need to deal with them in a sensible fashion. But I think Hillary cast that vote for political reasons, and not what was for our best interest. She was willing to go along with Bush's warmongering ways as a way to show she was tough. That, to me, shows she follows her interests, and not the country's interests. Also the way she is conducting her campaign (the sleaze ball tactics and her willingness to divide the country along race and gender for her own benefit) further supports this. I'm not saying that any candidate is sterling (and Obama isn't). But I really do want a President whose words and actions of unity both match. I'm really tired of politicians who use some variant of the “I'm a uniter not a divider” line. They say it, but then turn right around and do just the opposite. Obama (to my knowledge) has not said it, rather he says, “We are one America.” He sees us as being in this together. Obama has also been the most consistent in his positions of any of the candidates. He doesn't flip flop just to gain votes.

To be fair, though… I think all the candidates (both Dem and Rep.) do want what is best for the country. It's just that they have different ideas.

For Bush it's “I'm President, I'm right so do as I say at all costs.”

For Hillary it's, “I'm President, here's what I want. What do we need to do to achieve it. Who do we need to negotiate with?”

For Obama it's, “I'm President and this issue is very important to the country. What are your thoughts on solving it?” Obama may have his own ideas but he wants others' input before a final decision. Obama is the only candidate truly interested in understanding others' points of view and addressing their concerns.

Lastly, I do share some of your thoughts and concerns on Obama's dazzle factor. But in Bush we elected someone who was likable, had years of experience running one of the largest states in the country AND someone who came from one of America's political dynastic families. He was sure to be a good President…. And yet that still didn't work out for us….

Because Bush has caused so much division in this country (and with him it's always “us versus them”) we need someone who can heal our country. That's the most important task for the next President. Certainly we need a competent President who can appoint cabinet members to run the government, but at this time we are sorely in need of a charismatic leader who can show us what it means to be Americans. Someone who can heal, inspire and motivate us to become a better America.

So if you want to know who is better for the day to day running of the government (which will be done be various departments and cabinet members anyway) all the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. All would do better than Bush and the “dazzle” factor isn't important with regards to that. However if you want to know which candidate can heal our soul and inspire us, that is Obama, no question about it. Not just because he's charismatic, but because he's the only one who understands this need.

Obama is the choice–he's got the momentum and he has captured the imagination of the public.