Cold feet

For months and months and months, I complained that I didn't like either Obama or Clinton, but if I had to choose between them, there was no question that I'd choose Obama over Clinton.

By the time we were down to three people, however, my grudging preference for Obama had become genuine admiration. That's not to say that I loved everything about him, and I still liked Edwards better in many ways, but I had decided that Obama wasn't so bad after all. Especially compared to Clinton, whose husband was starting to become offensive (like the time he dismissed Obama's win in SC, saying "Jesse Jackson won there too").

Then Edwards dropped out, and I decided that Obama and I were a done deal. But then there was the debate on Thursday night, which changed everything. Well... it changed one thing. I decided it would be more than okay with me if Clinton became president. It'd still be great if Obama won, but Clinton would be great too. And I was convinced that either of them had an excellent chance of beating Romney or McCain in the general election.

The weekend passed. Nothing changed.

Then yesterday morning, I read a letter in the newpaper from a local woman who recalled Clinton's work in New Bedford in 1973. (Read this awesome article to find out what project she worked on next.)

New Bedford, of all the damn places. Clinton had been doing good deeds in New Bedford back when she was nobody. (Not that Obama was any kind of lazy slob back in the day, either.)

I was impressed by the story, and it made me feel even better about the possibility of another Clinton presidency if things didn't work out for Obama.

I promptly forgot about it for a few hours. Later, when I was halfway up the stairs with a basket of laundry, it occurred to me: I could vote for Clinton in the primary instead of Obama!

Simple, yes. But I had never entertained that thought before. Suddenly, though, I felt obligated to come up with a reason not to do it.

I weighed my thoughts for the rest of the afternoon and all evening. I thought about it while she was on Letterman. I woke up early this morning and thought some more while I lay in bed for an hour and a half, watching pre-primary coverage, still mulling it over.

I thought about it as I got dressed and drove to the polling place.

Every argument I could think of, for or against either candidate, had an equally compelling counterargument. Here's a tiny sample:

• Clinton was great in 1973. But after all she's been through, is she the same person now that she was then? Does she do these things because she really cares, or only because she's ambitious and expects a reward? Does it matter what her motivation is if the outcome helps people? Doesn't all this hard work deserve a reward? But is the presidency a suitable reward?
  

• Would our having a female president further antagonize conservative Muslim governments against us, or are they already maxed out, hatewise? Do we care? If she sends a representative to negotiate with them in her stead, would that be taken as a slight? Would Bill Clinton make a great emissary, or would they see him as the president's emasculated errand-boy? Is it sexist and/or racist and/or realistic to think that Obama would be more effective in this role?
  

• Is there any more dirt the Republicans can dig up on the Clintons? Even if there is, haven't they proven to be pretty much mudproof by now? Could there be unforeseen dirt on Obama as well, and if so will he be as able to fend it off?
  

• Isn't it extremely difficult to write off Clinton's eight years of White House experience? On the other hand, isn't it equally difficult to write off the memory of how contentious things became between the Clinton White House and the Republican leadership? Is that divisiveness permanent? Would we have to live through another four to eight years of that bullshit?
  

• What's more likely to hurt a campaign in the general election: racism or sexism? Will this disappear after the election? Will it increase the odds of an assassination attempt?
  

• Clinton often seems plastic. I don't like this, but other voters seem to respond to it. Does a plastic exterior guarantee a hollow interior? Or does it hide something really huge? Is it possible that Clinton's been holding out on us, and she can do a lot more than we think she can?

• Why am I not asking similar questions about Obama?

• Clinton is more conservative than I would like. A moderate approach is often more likely to succeed, but a person with greater charisma has a better chance of getting buy-in on more ambitious plans.
  

Ultimately, I realized that I couldn't let this one, very old story about Clinton in New Bedford reverse all of the reasons I preferred Obama. Much of it came down to a personal preference in the candidates' styles. Of course I have doubts and unanswered questions, but it would be strange if I didn't. At least this time, if the person I didn't vote for gets the nomination, I won't be filled with dread.

Having two good choices made the decision very difficult. How ironic that I had so much angst over a situation where even a "bad" outcome (Clinton gets the nomination) would be okay with me. It's not as if a terrible thing will happen as the result of my making the "wrong" choice.

Even when we're satisfied that we know all we need to know, there are no guarantees. At some point, you have to settle for the information that's available, and hope that the person you put your faith in doesn't screw you over or get run over by a truck.

(I got to the polling place around 8:30. My ballot was #33. Not a bad turnout, for a primary.)