Just watched this (completely forgot last night). Strangely, the image that kept pushing its way in was of Reagan-- someone who really believes in his vision, has been thoughtful about how to accomplish it, and the arc of whose life (whoa ,tortured phrase, sorry), has led him here (whether or not you agreed without notwithstanding). Rather than the kind of entitlement resume-building that was both the Clintons and the Bushes.

I think a similar kind of excitement (not nearly the same scale or intensity though) built up when Clinton was elected, because he was self-made and didn't come from privilege. In DC media I keep seeing references to a walk Clinton took down Georgia Ave after he was elected. Everyone thought meant he'd pay real attention to DC and help the city out, but he didn't. Now everyone's wondering if Obama will similarly dash their hopes for more local attention.

Yeah, a somebody was talking about the interview and how much Obama seemed like her, i.e. didn't have an easy life, had to work hard as opposed to being born rich, etc, etc.

In one aspect, that's neat, but he's only human and is bound to make mistakes. On the plus side though, we probably don't have to worry about him an Alzheimer's.

Obama and McCain have a chat.

Well I meant Bill Clinton. I think Hillary Clinton does not have the same populist appeal. Respect, yes. Rapport, no.

With Bill Clinton it always seemed that it was all about Bill Clinton, but with Obama it seems like it really is more about the issues than his own personal aspirations. (I say that knowing full well that nobody who runs for president is an altruist.*) I was not happy that Obama moved from the left to the center after he was nominated, and I know there's a lot more where that came from, but I think hope he won't compromise on everything just to stay in power the way Clinton did.

(*Except maybe Dennis Kucinich.)