Being from New York I would prefer having New York's senator as president. New York would benefit from it.

Wait, you were serious?

I'm voting for the candidate who is ABC.

Anyone

But

Clinton

Obama has won more delegates than Hillary so far in the primaries, having won more than her in every primary/caucus except for tying in NH. Hillary is ahead in delegate count only because of the Democratic Party's antiquated "super-delegate" system.

Super-delegates automatically get to cast a vote at the convention to decide who the party’s nominee will be. Hillary is ahead on that front based on the number of super-delegates (201 to Obama's 116) who have come out in favor of her up to this point. Backroom politics.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

Obama will increase the Democrat Party's base in ways that the Clinton are simply not capable of. He does well with new voters and Independents.

As for foreign policy experience, Obama was against the war before we invaded Iraq, when it was politically unwise to do so. The Iraq war is THE biggest foreign policy failure of our lifetime. I don't think ppl should overlook that so easily.

This constant " is better than Bush" is getting really tiresome. Slightly better than crap is still crap. And Bush isn't running which makes me wonder when some of you are going to stop using him as a crutch to prop up your candidate. 2012?

MaiaW--

I agree that lobbyists have been and are always a problem and that politicians use them as a boogeymen. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't things that can't be done to curb them, particularly after 8 out-of-control years under Bush. I have never been able to figure out how politicians give out specifics during campaign speeches. I usually read about it in the papers or over the last years, their websites. But when you say he doesn't have a plan, that's what I take issue with. While he might not get the plan done against these powerful entities, you can't say he hasn't tried in Illinois or DC or doesn't have a plan as president:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/

To be fair, here's where Clinton stands on these issues:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/reform/

Of course, neither candidate is free of lobbyist-related rumors or maladies, but a little personal research goes a long way.

"If the glove don't fit, you must acquit."

Same lack of an intelligent audience that is allowed to vote, just a different venue.

Elderata - Here's an example: In his speech last night, Obama talked about how he's going to end the practice of lobbyists running Washington if he gets elected President. I mean, it's a nice sentiment and all, but it's just not going to happen. Government officials have been influenced by money since this country was first born. So it's that kind of "giving them what they want to hear" that's a little unnerving.

Say something shocking, babyhitler. Astound us.

As a black person, I'm not voting for Obama on his record. I'm voting for him cause he's black. And if you don't vote for Obama you is racist! I heard Clinton say the there would be dark days ahead if Obama wins. That's some fucking racist shit right there! "dark" days. Get it?

Caroline has always been reluctant to be vocal in public on politics so it's significant to hear from her in this way. It is an emotional card but still powerful. Teddy is supposedly going to endorse him next.

The election will come down to continuing the Bush (GOP) years or changing from that approach (Democrats).

Clinton has more delegates at the moment. Plus she has a lock on the Democratic Party's superdelegates. Being from New York I would prefer having New York's senator as president. New York would benefit from it.

I really don't understand how people can say that they don't know Obama's plans, particularly when it's obvious that folks here have an Internet connection. Stump speeches are just that.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

All I can say is that I'd rather listen to Obama for four years in the White House than Hilary and Bill again and the same old blood in the water politics that will happen if she wins for another four years. Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton? Ugh, I don't even want to think about it.

My comment about Caroline Kennedy had little to do with the validity of what she said (frankly, I agree with her, but...), rather with how her comments will touch many voters who remember JFK. That might be enough to swing states like FLA, MASS and NY in the primaries and build further momentum.

As for the comments of Karen and SimonLoc, a careful look at his legislative record will reveal a thoughtful public servant with far more foreign policy experience than, say, George W. Bush.

From the wikipedia listing on Obama (I know, wikipedia is not acceptable as a reference in academic circles):

As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. In August 2005, he traveled to Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan. The trip focused on strategies to control the world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons, and weapons of mass destruction as a first defense against potential terrorist attacks. Following meetings with U.S. military in Kuwait and Iraq in January 2006, Obama visited Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories. At a meeting with Palestinian students two weeks before Hamas won the legislative election, Obama warned that "the U.S. will never recognize winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel." He left for his third official trip in August 2006, traveling to South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Chad. In a nationally televised speech at the University of Nairobi, he spoke forcefully on the influence of ethnic rivalries and corruption in Kenya. The speech touched off a public debate among rival leaders, some formally challenging Obama's remarks as unfair and improper, others defending his positions.

I'm sorry Edwards has not emerged as more of a choice thusfar, but my vote is with Barack. I can't let Hillary live down the Iraq authorization vote and feel the war is issue #1 in this election. Both candidates are similar on energy policy, the economy and health care.

He's an empty suit

I'll vote with fervor for whichever Dem wins this thing. But I still fail to see how Obama plans to do things any differently than any other Democrat who has been in the White House over the past several decades. As someone up there said, he does talk a good game and gives inspirational sermon-like speeches about change and doing things differently, but, to borrow from one Clara Peller, where's the beef? I'm really curious to know what his magical silver bullet is, because I'm just not getting it. He fails again and again to get into specifics, and I have a serious problem with that. People have started saying, well Bill Clinton was a newbie also! But I think there's a big difference: before assuming the presidency, Mr. Clinton had already run a state government! Anyway, I agree with the Times: experience is more important now than inspiration. We need someone who can get the job done now.

@SimonLok You should consider our man Rudy Giuliani, who we believe is the perfect candidate for the Presidency of the United States.

@SimonLok - To make a fair comparison, I think we need to review policy plans laid out on both candidate's websites - NOT stump speeches. Obama has made a STYLISTIC decision to make his speeches inspirational rather than rattling off his specific policy ideas. I personally have no question about his intelligence (he got into two top schools ON HIS OWN STEAM, unlike our current president), and his grasp of the issues. Witness this excerpt from The Atlantic a couple of months ago:

"Earlier this fall, I attended an Obama speech in Washington on tax policy that underwhelmed on delivery; his address was wooden, stilted, even tedious. It was only after I left the hotel that it occurred to me that I’d just been bored on tax policy by a national black leader. That I should have been struck by this was born in my own racial stereotypes, of course. But it won me over."

Tax policy! Now that's not something you will see him expounding at length about on the stump! But he CAN, he has just made a conscious decision not to and to inspire instead. I can live with that.

On the second point about experience, I am not sure what experience Hillary is referring to. Her time in the White House? While she was far more involved than the average First Lady, I personally don't think that can be counted as executive experience. I guess that's just my opinion. I also think that this 2-for-1 can't turn out well -- the reason why co-Leaders and co-CEOs really never work. As we have recently witnessed, Bill can't resist getting involved, and that will hamper her if she is elected - who's in charge?

Go Rudy!

When will this thing be over? I'm tired of this stuff.