Obviously politics requires a certain degree of compromise, the question is one of degree. So far, Clinton hasn’t given me any reason to believe that she is willing to really fight for anything other than her own career. I agree: there is a good chance Obama will see his policies stymied by a Washington stultified by politics-as-a-vocation. But that hardly seems like a good reason to vote someone in who is steeped in that culture.

Do we really want a President who peddles hope over policy?

It took me a second to figure out which candidate you meant here. Unfortunately, it is really hard to know what Clinton might accomplish in four years beyond her own survival. Rhetoric need not be empty simply because it is rhetoric. Clinton seems all too willing to say whatever it takes to be elected, without much hope of any real change.

Are you suggesting that we pick someone who peddles policy over hope?

In the end, I think Clinton will continue to do good work as a senator, and working in the senate requires compromise to an extraordinary extent. As a leader, you need to know when compromise is unacceptable. I don’t know where Clinton is unwilling to compromise, and that concerns me.

But, it’s the notion that things will change that really bothers me, because in the cold light of day, Obama will have no choice but to sit at the table with all the vested interests, and if he wants to get the business done, the first thing he’ll have to do is learn the greatest political skill of all, and that is compromise. Each and every time he does, a little bit of the shine will dim and sooner rather than later, a generation of voters who believed the dream, will become as disaffected with politics as the generation before them. I don’t doubt Obama’s sincerity or desire, it’s a shame that it isn’t tempered with experience. I don’t claim that he would set out with anything other than the best intentions, but he would be forced to sit at a table where the other players have comfortable seats, big stakes and have honed the rules they play by.

Sorry, but I believe that rhetoric won’t get the job done. After Bush, we need a safe pair of hands, experience and substance. Obama is appealing to our emotions, but it’s nothing more concrete than that – do we really want a President who peddles hope over policy? This is the biggest, toughest job in the world, I think the post holder should have more to offer than the endorsements of the ancient regime and hope.

Please vote for Hillary Clinton.