Revolutionary Moderation

Super Tuesday

Oh, the barrels of ink that have been expended on both the pigment of Barack Obama's skin, and Hillary Clinton's lack of a Y-chromosome. What a waste. Aside from policy differences, which certainly accounts for some of the split, what the candidates represent (inasmuch as they represent something other than themselves) is more subtle than colour or gender.

People are supporting Clinton because she harkens back to a pre-Dubya era. Her campaign is a restoration campaign, just as Dubya's was. She talks a lot about experience, but her seniority in that area only applies if the collective experience of both Clintons is taken into account.

Likewise, people are drawn to Obama because he seems younger, more energised, certainly more articulate; indeed, with a certain New England family's endorsement last week, he looks more and more like a Kennedy all the time. After seven years of "nucular", what American isn't attracted to the candidate who may be America's best orator in a generation?

To paraphrase MLK, these two candidates are being judged not by the colour of their skin, nor the type of their gender. They may even possibly be judged by the content of their character. If only the punditocracy could move to that point.

Aside from my own thoughts, you may be interested to see an analysis of how the voting will shake out today. The Calgary Grit has pointed me toward a state-by-state analysis (as of Jan 31) at the Daily Kos to discover a within-the-margin-of-error statistical tie for the Democrats today. Print it out and follow along at home! It's like a second Super Bowl, and likely to be as close.