His campaign is at an interesting juncture right now. In the next three weeks I think it will become clear whether he is a legitimate nomination-worthy politician, or just another mecurial flight of fancy.
I was skeptical from the start of the Obama craze. I read parts of his books and found them wholly without substance, and I doubted that any kind of true political coalition could be built on such a flimsy, cotton candy foundation. At some point, I argued, he would have to dispense with the inspirational but empty rhetoric about "change" and talk about how he would actually govern. And then people would see he is basically your garden variety big-city lefty.
But as he gathered steam and steamrolled Hillary in Iowa, I started to rethink it. I believed the New Hampshire polls, and thought "Holy crap! The Democrats hate Hillary so much they just might hand it to this eminiently unqualified guy!"
But the polls were wrong, and now everything is up in the air again. As much as it was very satisfying to think Hillary was getting a much deserved comeuppance, and that the end of the Clinton era was upon us, I also knew that Hillary is the candidate I want a Republican to run against in the fall.
So it is all in flux now, and that makes things very entertaining. It should remain so right up to super-Tuesday.
On Obama, an editorial today by Rich Lowry put it quite well:
Ultimately, the problem for Obama is that he is promising something that is impossible - a harmonic convergence of the country around what, at bottom, is an utterly conventional liberal policy agenda.