Why I Support Senator Obama for Election '08

Before I get into my opinion, I should say that I think it's crucial that everyone independently assesses the facts for themselves before coming to a decision. I'm trying my best to appeal to logic, but obviously that logic is, on the basis of evolutionary reality, interwoven with my own emotional context. So I highly recommend you check out the biased and unbiased sources for yourself:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com
http://www.barackobama.com
http://www.factcheck.org


Opinon. While I'm not extremely informed on the nuances of either campaign platform, I feel comfortable saying that Obama and Clinton's priorities, as presented in their campaign platforms, are nearly the same. Both have fairly aggressive (and actually, quite similar) environmental policies specifically geared to curbing carbon emissions and energy dependency. Both advocate ending the Iraq war and expanding diplomacy with other nations (ie. Iran). Both advocate similar "opt-in" universal health care policies. Both recognize the need to boost our faltering educational system. And I'm not crazy in thinking the two candidates are reading from a similar page ideologically. According to factcheck.org, "the two candidates vote with Democrats more than 90 percent of the time and [have] voted with each other 94 percent of the time."

Thus I don't base my support of Obama on specific issues so much as the overarching needs of this country and what I perceive each candidate can provide. Some would argue that this country needs someone to bring it back to the middle after Bush's reign, someone experienced who can roll into office ready to patch up what he trucked up, but I disagree that experience is a boon for this nation. The last first-term senator from Illinois didn't do so badly, now did he? I'm not saying that Obama is necessarily going to usher in the sort of new age for our nation that Lincoln did, but I'm saying it's possible, as history shows, that inexperienced politicians can do great things and experienced ones can blow it bigtime. (See picture.)

I am of the opinion that experience has tempered Clinton's passion and desire for real change. We need change on two levels. First, we need progressive national policy change to enable our country to undo the damage it's done internationally and enable Americans to live healthier, more peaceful, more satisfied (and more responsible) lives. I think that both Clinton or Obama are capable of bringing about this sort of change and indeed both have a similar agenda for doing so. Second, and perhaps most importantly, we need to reclaim this nation for the people and by the people. I'm talking about the sort of change in office that invigorates people on an individual level. What sort of change is it to have our country run by the same two families for 24 (possibly 28 years?) It reeks of everything our political system isn't supposed to be about. We're not living in a democracy, at least not one that most people bother utilizing or paying attention to through local levels of government, where true democracy actually works. On the national level we're a meritocracy, where the only real merits are wealth and familial political fame.

Contrasted with Clinton, Obama has the potential to bring the change I speak of. We need a president with the vitality and passion to bring people together and more or less heal some of the deep divisions in this nation. Over 600,000 Americans (myself included) have made personal donations to his campaign (bloomberg.com) . Indeed, he is building one of the strongest grassroots networks of presidential supporters our nation has seen. According to Bloomberg.com he's raised $7.1 million in just two days in response to Hillary's announcement that she has loaned her campaign $5 million. As another stark example, in January Clinton raised $13 million. According to Bloomberg.com, "Obama, by contrast, collected $32 million, the most ever raised by a Democrat in January of an election year, $28 million of which was raised in online donations." This offers a strong preliminary indication that he has an incredible power to involve the average person.

I should note that my support of Obama doesn't diminish the respect I have for Clinton's candidacy. I do believe that she's an incredibly saavy, intelligent, and passionate (and odds are, like most of us, feeling) person, and that the expectations on her as a woman have been many and uniquely hard. But nevertheless, aside from her work with the health care system, I feel she does not bring a unique or fresh perspective to Washington. She's a woman, but she's rich, she's white, and she's not particularly concerned with overturning the status quo of meritocracy. I suppose, on a personal note, I do tend to underestimate the oppression of women, and the enormity of Clinton's campaign success. Yet that is not a substantial reason in itself to vote for her, just as it is not a substantial reason to vote for a candidate because he is biracial and the child of a Kenyan immigrant (as much as I feel his election would substantially bump our credibility in the world.) If I vote for Clinton, it will be for superficial reasons. I want my vote to mean more than that. Whether that means voting for Clinton or Obama, I hope everyone else does, too. That's why I support Barack Obama.