Interesting choice. I like it when "conspiracy" thinking is proven wrong on either side. This does it for me. I'm not sure what he brings pragmatically, but he sets the ground for... 1. leadership in the hands of one who best satisfies the left in the party. (he's the ultimate Republican's "No man") 2. The ability, thereby, to nominate a true moderate with some sense that the extreme is not completely out of the loop, nor completely in charge. Now if only the Democrats can overcome "dynastic" thinking and nominate Evan Bayh instead of H. Clinton in 2008.
|