It seems like everybody is declaring their support for somebody, so I figured I’d better wade in better it became old news. Never mind that I’m Canadian and therefore can’t, you know, vote.
From my reading, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of policy difference between Clinton and Obama. I’m rooting for Obama because he seems like more of a visionary and an agent of change. He’s also the superior orator. That may not make him a better president, but I might have to listen to one of them for the next four or eight years, so I’m going with the better public speaker. Plus, I’m not a fan of dynasty presidents. After all, how’s the current one working out?
DarrenBarefoot.com 
His PR team will be happy to see you explaining yourself with the expression “agent of change.”
Either you’ve reached meta-PR-dude level and actually think and write in pure slogan-ese, or (and this would be his PR team’s wet dream), you’ve adopted their way of thinking and expressing ideas as your own.
Either way, it’s Miller Time!
JD: I picked that term knowingly, and have used its variant before. Barack’s message is obviously one of change. Everybody has to govern to the middle, but compared to what I’d expect Ms. Clinton to deliver, I expect he would engender a lot of change. Heck, the first black president is plenty of change in itself.
I concur: at least the speeches will sound good. Have you seen his South Carolina victory speech? Awesome. And as president, you can be sure that he will NOT give Chancellor Merkel an unwanted backrub, nor call to the Prime Minister of Great Britain by saying, “Yo Brown.”
Actually I think any of the top 3 — Clinton, Obama, Edwards — would make a perfectly fine president. The bar has been lowered so far these past few years, any one of them could be stunning.
Top 3 Democrats, I should say.
There is a place for Canadians to voice their support for Barack Obama. Of course, it is on Facebook:
http://tinyurl.com/2yw3pk
Are you *sure* you’re picking the best candidate?
Glassbooth is a site that lets you match your personal beliefs with those expressed by the candidates. A Lavalife for the voting booth, if you will.
I write about it today:
http://www.buzzbishop.com/blog/2008/01/28/is-charisma-an-election-issue/
I agree. For some different reasons, and some of the same. I just don’t trust Clinton, and Edwards doesn’t have the strength of conviction.