The Choice:
In this respect the Obama campaign is uniquely circular: his political appeal is rooted in the fact that he’s so politically appealing. This means that when he loses, the loss affects him worse than it would other candidates, since it also cuts against his message. But when he wins, particularly when he wins big, as he did in Iowa and South Carolina, the win means more because it reinforces the basic argument of his campaign.
(Via Matthew Yglesias.)
Until recently, I was torn between voting for Edwards (the get-the-lobbyists-out agenda speaks to me) and Obama. That choice was made for me when Edwards “suspended” his campaign, but if it hadn’t already been decided, this article might have pushed me over.
I especially like the circular reasoning in this quote, because it’s absolutely true; the reason Obama is a good primary candidate is that he has the potential to be a great general election candidate. It’s not just “electability” (truly, I’d be happy with any of the Democrats and maybe even McCain), but one of (dare I say it) change. Obama has the potential to plow into office with such force as to change the system, just like the Reagan Revolution did twenty-odd years ago: by bringing the country with him.
Now all they need is a catchy alliterative term for it. The Obama Overrun? The Barack Barrage?