Some students came to Iowa with support for one candidate over the others already clearly defined. I was on the fence between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for most of the trip. I volunteered one day for Obama and the next for Clinton, and I heard them both speak. I needed all the information, I felt, about their campaigns, their positions, their leadership abilities. I wanted to make a thoughtful, informed decision, to assess both candidates based on not only who appealed to my imagination but who would be able to affect the change that I desperately believe the US needs. A few of my findings, for your perusal:
Hillary Clinton is an extraordinary woman. She is a brilliant intellect, passionate about public service, humble, grateful, resilient, determined, and pragmatic. At her pre-caucus rally, I found her an excellent public speaker, clear and honest. She spoke about many aspects of her campaign that make me personally identify with her, such as the great responsibility that comes with receiving opportunities and privileges that one had no part in creating, and the value of hard, grueling work over political flash. She has all the substance, all the policies about domestic reform (education, health care) and regaining international respect that would make her a wonderful president. Personally, as a woman of similar cloth, I believe in the value of this substance over the elusive charisma. My beef with the Clinton campaign thus has nothing to do with the Senator herself.
Her audience was all old people. I know it’s her core audience, but that’s not good enough. My group, high school students, was specifically asked to sit in the very back of the hall, to clear room for the elderly closer to the stage. A considerate position, and I gladly give my seats to those older than I, but it’s interesting that youth were proactively marginalized. When three of us went to the Clinton office to volunteer the next day, we were passed through the hands of four or five different people before someone would give us a job. We felt like we were inconveniencing them, even though we were volunteering to help. There were also Hillary supporters guarding the doors to her offices, as if they suspected sabotage. It felt exclusive, like a club to which you had to gain entrance by officially declaring total allegiance to Clinton. Once we were “in” we met some really neat, dedicated people, but it wasn’t easy to come on in. We also phone banked with calls to only her declared supporters, making sure they came out to caucus. A logical strategy, but it make her campaign feel entrenched, already set in its ways, relying on an old guard versus a new coalition. If we are running up against bureaucracy and the backing of only past supporters (of a certain age) in her campaign, what will her White House look like? Senator Clinton is a wonderful candidate. Her campaign bodes poorly for her administration.
Obama’s campaign, on the other side, was phoning independents up until the last moment before the caucus, still trying to put talk into action and build a unified coalition, from many different walks of life. This type of phone banking, to people who frequently hang up or curse you out, feels more futile. In retrospect, it’s very idealistic, reaching out to a wide cross section of the population. The volunteers at the Obama office couldn’t have been friendlier, asking our individual opinions and welcoming us without question. I saw an Obama volunteer, a college guy, stay on line with a constituent for 45 minutes, trying to answer a very difficult, specific question about Obama’s health care policy. They are as educated about the candidate as Clinton volunteers, and as passionate. The difference is that they are trying to spread the enthusiasm, not keep it close. And, looking over the audience at the Obama victory speech, it occurred to me that the diversity of ages, races, creeds, and backgrounds represented at that event represented the US that I love and in which I live drastically more accurately than the mostly elderly, white, professional audience for Clinton. As much as I respect Clinton (and feel like I’m campaigning for myself), Obama’s ability to unite and to inspire a large, much more heterogeneous segment of the population is what I believe that the US needs in the president now. Obama’s programs are strong. He also has strong positions on education, health care, and, though with less experience, foreign policy. I’ve read his policy outline thoroughly. With his eloquence and fresh eyes, he will be better able to accomplish these goals while in office. I think idealism can work. The natural progression from ideals to practical policies and legislation has worked before; it’s not crazy. I am a young person. Some might say naïve, but I prefer hopeful.