- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
First, pretty much everything has got he has got. His healthcare plan is slightly more realistic, his immigration plan is pretty much the same, but on foreign affairs he is actually the stronger of the two.
There policies are so similar that they are almost interchangeable.
So then he's not really any more of a change candidate than main-stream, boring, establishment Hillary, right?
Except on the biggest issue of them all. Lobbying reform.
Obama is anti-lobbying firms, Hillary is not. Now Obama's stance is questionable (He doesn't take money from lobbying firms, but he doesn't object to their staff donating) but Hillary's stance is clear as daylight - she won't reduce the power of lobbying interests in America.
And that, though it is a wild hope, though it is a promise he is likely to break, even some progress towards reducing the power of lobbies in America, would be a change for the better.
You think that's going to happen? You're so sweet.
But if you do compare their plans on this:
Hillary - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/reform/
Barack - http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/
They are pretty similar - no bid contracts, transparency, etc. Barack's is, for once, much more specific than Hillary's.
Plus, what do you think of Barack Obama's campaign donating money to the campaigns of various superdelegates, presumably to get their votes? :)
