The case for Obama

Opinion polls for the past few months constantly pitched Hillary Clinton as the democratic front runner, and I viewed these with constant disbelief. The opinion of Washington pundits aside, it is hard to imagine the average Jane or Joe rooting for Hillary. Voters can be roughly divided into two groups - people who do not really follow politics, and people who do. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the former will have a major perception problem with Hillary, and the latter will most certainly have a problem with Hillary's stance on Iraq.

It is probably unfair to judge a book by it's cover, but politics is all about perception, and people do not really get the warm fuzzies when they see Hillary. She is too guarded, too practiced, too focus-grouped, and too opinion-polled. As she is afraid to be herself, she comes up short when compared to a slick Edwards or a warm, self-effacing Obama. Much like conventional desis, Americans are also typically guarded when it comes to rooting for strong willed, independent, career-oriented women. It is not a mere coincidence that a Laura Bush has wide spread support across party lines, and even Nancy Pelosi works over time to promote her nice ol' granny image. Hillary's performance as the junior senator from New York has been admirable, but, for a majority of the voting public who do not really deep dive into real politics, it is simply way too easy to dislike her.

For diehard democrats, it is really difficult to get past Hillary's vote for the Iraq war. She can nuance her stance on this forever, and her consultants can come up with all the necessary shpiel, but this does not change the reality; the consequences of the war have been disastrous, and also sadly anticipated by millions across the world....except, seemingly those who cast their votes. While voting for the war, Hillary could have either predicted these consequences or not. If she had predicted the consequences and still cast her vote, that makes her an unscrupulous politician who would rather give up her beliefs than cross paths with a then popular president. If she had not predicted the consequences, and cast her vote based on the "intelligence", that raises serious questions about her competency and capability to rule this nation. The same logic also taints all other contenders who voted for the war - John Edwards, John Mccain, and the likes.

The general unease about Hillary's candidacy is totally reflected in the first quarter fund raising numbers reported last week. Obama's 25 million came from thousands of average Janes and Joes, as opposed to Hillary's 26 million which was bolstered by her senate account, an undisclosed amount of general election contributions, and many friends left over from the Clinton years. I have nothing against Hillary - in fact, before Obama announced his candidacy, I was a major supporter. I do not have perception problems with her, but I simply cannot look past her Iraq vote.