Views

"Is the view pretty good from the cheap seats, AJ?"
- Andrew Shepherd, The American President

I'm not even in the cheap seats -- I'm out in the parking lot, or possibly still on the highway, stalled behind a semi toting chickens. (Which I actually was, a couple of times, when I lived in Texas; good lord, roll up the windows, put the vent on recirculate, and take shallow breaths.) But even so, I feel qualified to comment on the race between Clinton and Obama, which is surely entering its final laps.

First off, though I hope that Obama wins, I think that Clinton's got a chance -- but only if she can persuade enough of the superdelegates to go her way. I think that would be a bad way to go, as its all but waving a flag saying 'Yes, I'm an old style politician, and I don't care what the genereal sense of the populace is'. The problem is, an old style politician's rule of thumb is win first, apologise later, if at all, so I don't think that possibiliy can be ignored. I've seen some people urging her to quit, but I can't see that happening. She's got to lose.

Second, if Obama does win the primary, he's still got the issue of proving that he'd be able to be effective. Curiously enough, it occurs to me that no one's asking Clinton this -- it seems to be entirely driven by Obama's rhetorical style, the assumption being that anyone who orates that well can't have ability, too. He recently said this:

"Contrary to what she's been saying, it's not a choice between speeches and solutions. It's a choice between a politics that offers more of the same divisions and distractions, that didn't work in South Carolina and didn't work in Wisconsin and will not work in Texas...."

which I think makes the point. Its rhetoric saying that you need to believe the prior rhetoric. He has to make the case that he is not only able to solve the massive problems that Bush is leaving behind, but able to do it better than McCain. There are a goodly number of people who prefer McCain, and though Obama's done amazing things in winning people of divergent attitudes over, he hasn't won everybody. How can he show that he'll be effective, if elected? Heck, for that matter, how effective can he be? Because, though she's saying it for political benefit, Clinton's right in saying that rhetoric alone doesn't win the day -- you have to be able to devise solutions (which I think he's shown), and implement them in a possibly hostile (ie, whats in it for me?) environment. And though I suspect Illinois politics is no bed of roses, this is the biggest of the big leagues. How will he fare? What can he offer past that magnificient vision that's provably better than McCain?

Yes, the view from the cheap seats really is pretty good.