HILLARY Clinton is not the answer. This is what I say to anyone who believes Clinton's victory in the 2008 Democratic primary is all but a given. Last week, the answer to the Democratic prayers may have been answered. Barack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, announced that he was considering a presidential run in 2008. Despite his limited experience, Obama would give the Democrats the best chance to win back the White House.
Barack Obama's political experience is, as critics of a 2008 run would charge, limited. Obama worked in the Illinois State Senate from 1997 to 2004 and is currently just two years into his first Senate term. In that time, Obama also lost a run for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 2000 Democratic primary.
This limited experience might make a presidential run seem preposterous, but the times call for special circumstances. Obama rose to national prominence with an inspiring keynote address at the 2004 Democratic convention. He has been a media darling ever since, but don't mistake him for a mere political pawn without any substance.
Obama has repeatedly shown a knack for compromise. During that 2004 speech, Obama spoke of striving for purple, rather than Democratic blue and Republican red. In the Illinois State Senate, he was praised for working with both Democrats and Republicans. He has already shown great poise in the U.S. Senate, drawing encouragement from peers to run in 2008. The British journal New Statesman listed Obama as one of 10 people who could change the world.
In evaluating the 2008 Democratic candidates, we see that Obama would quickly rise to the top of the list. Other possible Democratic candidates include the aforementioned Sen. Hilary Clinton, D-N.Y., Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack and Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., among others.
Clinton appears to be the early frontrunner. None of the other candidates seem strong enough for Democrats to feel confident, even in the current political climate. While Clinton has great name recognition, I strongly believe she does not represent the Democrats' best chance of victory.
First and foremost, she is a woman. Do not misinterpret my meaning: While I believe a woman would certainly be up to the presidency, it certainly will not be to her advantage that she is, in fact, a woman. There are many "traditional" individuals in this nation who believe only men can be President and will vote as such. This pertains to typical Republican and Democratic voters.
Second, Clinton is a polarizing candidate. Obviously, this relates to the point above, but many disagreed with the prominent role she played in national politics while she was first lady. This point is particularly troublesome when we consider the leading Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is known as a liberal within his party. Undoubtedly, many who would vote Democrat (both because they are typical Democrat voters and because of recent Republican shortcomings) may be tempted to vote for a more centrist Republican candidate if they already hold biases against Clinton.
This brings us back to Obama. In comparison to Clinton, he represents a far less polarizing choice. Obama's only polarizing feature is his skin color, not his politics. Obama is, of course, African-American. I would make the argument, however, that Obama's incredible political promise will help to transcend subtle biases among the American people. The loud ovations he has received across the nation (even in more conservative states such as President Bush's home state, Texas) are evidence of that.
It must also be noted that Obama is only 45 years old, a rather young age for a president. He could wait until 2012 to run for president and, in the meantime, gain political experience in the Senate. However, if the Democrats do win in 2008, the Democratic incumbent will no doubt run for reelection in 2012. That leaves Obama with a potential presidential bid in 2016. In 10 years, there is no way to know how strong support will be for Obama to make a presidential run. Right now, in 2006, Obama has more than enough support to make a presidential run.
Quinnipac University conducted a national "Thermometer" survey, asking 1,900 voters about their opinion of national leaders from a 0-100 score. Obama received a mean score of 59.9, the second highest rating overall (only Rudy Giuliani scored higher). Clinton, on the other hand, received a mean score of 50.4, well below Obama and potential opponent McCain who received a mean score of 59.7. While 59 percent of the nation said they did not know enough about Obama to rate him, it is a mere formality that the American people will quickly learn a great deal about both Obama's politics and character.
Barack Obama represents an incredible hope for both Democrats and the nation. Extensive experience in the Senate or as a governor does not mean a person is a strong presidential candidate, just as lack of experience does not mean a person is a weak candidate. Obama has shown both the tools of compromise and the popularity necessary to win the presidency now. That is more than what can be said about every other Democratic candidate.
Rajesh Jain is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at rjain@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
