For the party of the status quo it is always easier. Who best represents "stay the course." The only complication this year is how to be the candidate of stay the course without mentioning the president from whom you are inheriting the course.
For the party of reform, it is always more complicated. If it really were about who best represents change it would be easier. But there is also the human factor of power. For better or worse not everyone gets into politics to carry out reform. Some seek power, what most people think politics is all about. For those who have had power and seek to keep it or recapture it, they can claim to be for change and reform but they cannot bring it about because there are too many old arrangements, too many deals, too many old networks. They all prevent transition to a new age.
The Democratic party is once again faced with a decision: whether to stay with the known, the familiar, and the "experienced" or whether to accept a new generation of leadership composed of those who have not had power or the experience of governing. If you believe, as I do, that the early 21st century is an age of huge transition -- of globalization, of information, of failed states, of climate change, of rising new powers, and so on -- then leadership hamstrung by old arrangements and commitments will not do.
The contest between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is further complicated by unusual factors. Her gender. His race. Many women will vote for her simply because she is a woman. Many minorities will support him simply because he is an unusual black-American. That is human nature and to a great degree understandable. But gender and race cannot and should not obscure the larger realities. America is stuck. Those of us who met in Oklahoma City (the "Ben-Gay forum") think we are stuck in large part because of bitter partisanship. But we are also stuck because our leaders cannot see over the horizon ("the vision thing"). They do not see that we are living in an age of huge revolutions. They refuse to understand that we cannot resolve complex security issues merely by changing America's character and making this Republic an empire of unilateral intervention and occupation.
I have personal experience of the Democratic party at a generational crossroads. In the mid-1980s the Democratic party could play it safe and stay with a candidate they knew and with whom they were comfortable and familiar. Or they could take a chance with a new generation of leadership with a new understanding of a new age and new policies and ideas. They chose the former and they lost.
Democrats and Americans are faced with a big decision. Will we play it safe? Or will we embrace the future? This is not a time to put gender or race above what is best for the country or to make superficial choices. We have huge debts and deficits. The climate is rapidly approaching a tipping point. We are stuck in the Middle East. Most of the people in the world do not like us or trust us. Our education system is declining. And the list goes on.
Only a new generation of leaders can solve these new challenges, because only a new generation of leaders is unbound by old policies, old commitments and arrangements, old deals and old friendships. This is a time when America must leave old politics behind. This election is about transition not power. We will either move forward or we will go back.
Loading comments… 
Political parties are usurping power that should be ours. They do not serve the public. In fact they are standing between us and the candidates we want and the kind of government we need.
Dispensing with these dinosaurs and publicly funding elections would do more save our tattered republic than any other single issue.
We really need to move away from the neo-con empire vision. We really need to end the elite control on both finances and Washington politics. End the federal reserve, diversify ownership of the media, bring the IRS into accord with the Constituti
Open your eyes, Gary, and look around. He's not that unusual. There have been black doctors, lawyers, professors
How many Katrina's, before we examine why she was so costly? Imagine losing your home & livelihood
Don't let them pull the "wool over" with "non-issue
Every religion asks good stewardshi
Choose the BEST. Look only at the surface (main stream media), you aren't going to get the picture. Forgo this week's NFL, spend 4hrs READING/ch
Barack Obama is Mike Dukakis with oratory. He can win the nomination
Don't compare Hillary Clinton to Walter Mondale. Mondale was like a horse and buggy candidate who didn't realize he was living in an automobile age and he got buried with GOP newspeak.
I don't claim that Hillary is my ideal candidate, but she's a candidate who can win. Most of the hateful drivel I see in the comments section on Huffpost is from passionate neophytes who are getting sucked into repeating GOP talking points. I expect better analysis from you.
In what is my most important issue, Gay Rights, I am unconvince
Will Obama bring "change?" Probably on some superficia
Will he bring the troops home from 100+ occupied countries and dismantle the empire? No. Will he address our inflationa
And then once again we will talk of the need for "change," until our government finally collapses, Soviet-sty
as a campaign advisor
every member of the Daschle family is a lobbyist
The Obama campaign is full of humorless gits. (and weak sisters Daschle and Kerry)
The Bushes and the Clintons – who have held pieces of the nation’s executive power for more than a quarter century dating back to George H.W. Bush’s election as Vice President in 1980 – essentiall
In responding to Bill Clinton’s remark, George H.W. Bush issued a statement making clear he would not join in any slap at his son’s foreign policy. That also means Hillary Clinton’s “first thing” is unthinkabl
So, to get the senior Bush’s cooperatio
If Hillary Clinton does get elected, you can expect to hear lots of talk about “leaving that one for the historians