With John Edwards leaving the race, we’re pretty much guaranteed to have either the first woman or the first black man running for the White House on a major party ticket. That’s pretty historical and all, but it doesn’t much matter in how you should pick a candidate.

The two junior US Senators are alike in many ways. Both see a free market as something that must be controlled (ignoring any contradiction in terms). Clinton seems to say that capitalism, if left to its own devices, will destroy people. It must sometimes therefore be fought against by government. Obama is less hostile to capitalism as he is concerned about how to create a true free market through government policy. It’s a subtle difference. In his book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama wrote:

We should be asking ourselves what mix of policies will lead to a dynamic free market and widespread economic security, entrepreneurial innovation and upward mobility […] we should be guided by what works.

I’m interpreting a little bit here, but it seems like Obama believes that a true free market, and all the goods that come with it, can’t be expected to form without government policy. That’s certainly true to some extent. At the very least, there needs to be a fair civil court system. But Obama’s 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention showed that he believes government intervention in the market should be much more extensive.

The subtle differences on economic philosophy are perhaps best represented in their respective health care plans. Both candidates say it is time for universal, government health care, and they both see a private-public partnership in ensuring coverage is available to all. Both plans basically copy John Kerry’s 2004 plan of an option for a national and flexible group policy. The only real difference is that Obama’s plan is optional — an individual can decide to not be insured at all. Clinton’s plan, however, is mandatory. You must either receive free government care if you qualify or you must buy health insurance from either a private company or the new, public insurance.

I think this shows the subtle difference in their economic policy very well. Obama believes the government has a responsibility to provide the “social safety net.” His website also emphasizes how the availability of public health care would encourage free markets by giving more freedom to individuals to change jobs. Clinton, on the other hand, believes government has a mandate to control people. She gets to say her plan covers everyone, because she envisions using the police power of state to ensure everyone sees the doctor.

I could go on and on about different economic policies, but it’s the same story to me. They see the Presidency as managers. The only difference, to me, is that Obama sees the government’s role primarily as providing options while Clinton sees the government’s role as controlling markets. Both will probably have the same effect, but since these are the only two candidates, I give the edge to Obama.

Clinton has repeatedly flip-flopped on immigration, changing her mind at least three times on whether or not illegal immigrants should be allowed to have drivers licenses. She seems to lean toward the bipartisan immigration reform that McCain likes most of the time. Obama supports drivers licenses for illegals, but also voted for the border fence. Both are inconclusive, so neither gets the edge.

Both are pretty similar in foreign policy, although Obama gets credit for being against the Iraq War early on while Clinton voted for the war. Both say they’d be happy to bomb Iran as long as they made some sort of token guesture to diplomacy. Obama gets a slight nod for being against Iraq.

NARAL gives both candidates a 100% pro-abortion if that matters to you. Both are for civil unions for same-sex couples. Obama is happy to let states decide what is called “marriage,” as long as same-sex couples are allowed equal protection under the law, while Clinton has only stated opposition to same-sex “marriage.” Obama shows that he understands federalism to some small degree. Edge to Obama.

Both voted against the Military Commissions Act and support repealing the part about habeus corpus. Obama voted for the 2006 version of the Patriot Act while Clinton voted for both the 2001 and 2006 versions. When asked in the Las Vegas debate if human rights were more important than American national security, Obama said the two concepts were not contradictory while Clinton said national security was more important. Edge to Obama.

I’m not voting in the Democratic Presidential primary on Tuesday, but I would vote for Obama if I were.  I can’t say it’s a resounding endorsement, but it is one that I carefully considered. The Democratic winner of the primaries will likely win the general election in November, so it’s an important race.

In addition to the policy and record, I just like Obama more. And that’s important.

By the way, I can’t find it anymore, but I read somewhere online that there was a survey conducted that indicated that some Democrats picked their nominee based on how they viewed George W. Bush. It seems some people are going for the most anti-Bush person they can find. If you see Bush as a clinically retarded, you’re more likely to be for Clinton. If you see Bush as an evil mastermind, you’re more likely to be for Obama. I can’t remember the numbers, so it might not have been that conclusive.