Reply #11: I think any of the major candidates would do very well. But I agree their strategy could be better [View All]

[jpgray]

I'm not going to say "the media is going to turn on Obama," because they show far more signs of genuinely liking him than they did Gore or Kerry, but if they -do- turn on him, it's going to get ugly. Edwards's record in the Senate is completely lackluster and avoids all controversy (ditto Obama, especially on the funding votes), and Hillary's record is -very- nasty in places. Their rhetoric is really a collection of platitudes--choosing to believe one over the other doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since each is unsettling in his or her way. Obama echoes far too many right wing talking points on Social Security, the Great Society, Jimmy Carter, bipartisanship, etc. Edwards's rhetoric on poverty would be a lot more believable with a more solid record behind it, and Hillary has rampant triangulation syndrome.

Knowing where it comes from and why it is happening (the massively money-fueled campaign cycle and trivial media coverage almost demand such behavior) doesn't make the pill easier to swallow. However they are all possessed of some good qualities that are at least worth a GE vote considering the alternative.