You Make the Call: Clinton or Obama

Edwards, the only candidate who has never taken money from PACs and lobbyists, would be the ideal candidate for change here. If S.C. doesn't work out for him, though, Obama would be a worthy successor; Obama's work on ethics reform in the Illinois state legislature should especially be commended, and I see him (if the choices are Obama and Clinton) as someone who would push positive reform in ethics, special interest influence and so on.

until I get into the booth.  I'm an African American woman and frankly have an embarrassment of riches.  On issues there's not a lot that separates these two.  Don't know. Yet.

If I might express my opinion.  Barack Obama is fantastic, no doubt about it. He one day will be a terrific Senator, and will be a fantastic leader in the Democratic Party. However, his speaking abiliites and his charisma have not yet qualified him to be President.  THe illustions and comparisons to JFK and MLK that his campaign has welcomed (Yes Welcomed not started) are entirely too premature. Kennedy (as Hillary Clinton suggested) was tested long before his Presidential bid. And it goes without saying that the impact Martin Luther King had on the social and political climate of the U.S. has been unsurpassed.  But the biggest distinction between Sen. Obama and Keneedy and King is this: Martin Luther King and John Kennedy inspired change, when the majority of the country was content with the staus quo (that is to say white, middle-class America which was a clear majority in the 1950s and 1960s-at least when it came to access to the polls)-they brought about change. Obama is sitting on top of a snowball that has been rolling down a mountain for nearly 4 years-Everyone in the country wants change and Obama is simply tapping into that vein. In this respect Sen. Obama is preaching to the converted, not converting them.  On the other hand Sen. Clinton has demonstrated that she is capable of making change happen and is able to run the government.  If you ask Hillary Clinton HOW she plans to change the country she'll give you an answer-Sen. Obama when asked the same question gives an inspiring oration on WHY we need to change course, but cant tell you HOW he plans to do it. The media's framing of this debate (I.E. Expirience v. Change) is terrible. The two notions are not mutually exclusive-we can have both and that candidate is Sen. Clinton. Or so that is how it seems to me...

Isn't the point of the column is how Stile or others should not be using a candidate's fundraising supporters as a litmus test for their position on issues -- unless of course we're talking about campaign finance reform.