Warning: Rant Ahead

So, if I hear one more Hillary supporter say, "I can't in good conscience vote for Barack Obama," I might finally give up all hope in this thing called "democracy." I say this with the utmost respect. I admire commitment like that. I get it when people say that she's experienced and would make a good leader. Hell, I'm not even that much more partial to Obama--if Hillary were on the ticket, I'd punch her chad. But, one thing's for certain: I'm certainly not going to vote for McCain (or not vote at all) simply because my pick didn't get the nomination. I say this for two reasons:

First, the results up to this point are the product of competition. The DNC sets up the rules, and we all (presumably) abide by them because we don't raise objection (unless its months too late and you live in Florida). Then, the competition is played out and the winner gets the prize. We don't teach our children, when they lose the state soccer tournament, to lay in the middle of the field, scream their own name, wear shirts that say "We'll win next year!" and/or call in favors from their best friends to see if they can get the ruling on the field overturned. No. We teach how to lose with some dignity and how to keep our heads up when we congratuiate the winner. This is, in fact, what Hillary has done; but, her supporters just don't seem to get it. (By the way, I'll be the first to admit that I think the DNC and RNC rules are outdated and illogical, and that the whole two-party system is ruining politics as we know it; yet, that does not mean that we can just throw out the rules when it suits our needs.) I'm proud to see Hillary where she is today. I was proud to see her in the campaign. I'm also proud to see her bow out gracefully and allow the winner to accept the nomination.

Second, a question: Is there really much difference between these two? This is why I say above that I don't really care who is on the democratic ticket; either one suits my needs. I mean, come on. They could barely find things to disagree on in their debates. They had to make personal attacks to keep the damn thing interesting. When it comes down to it they're both politicians. Neither one is the savior that we need for the next eight years. They're politicians, plain and simple. If we wanted change we should have worked harder to nominate Kucinich or Ron Paul. They were change candidates. What we have here on the democratic ticket is a tinkerer (just like Hillary would have been)*. Tinkerers are not bad at all. We definitely have good things to look forward to if the Democrats are successful in November. But, they are not saviors and they are not change agents. They're politicians. The one thing they have going for them is that they are not Bush or McCain. That should be enough (for either).

Please, please, please, stop bringing up issues of conscience when speaking about how you are so torn during this election season. For all that is holy, drop the grudge, lose with dignity and support the best of the two candidates (unless, of course, you really have legitmate reasons for chosing a third party candidate--I'm for that). The problem is not that someone wants to exercise his freedom and independence to vote for who he wants, it's the fact that he will throw away the privilege just to make a display in the center of the field.

Am I wrong? Or just an asshole?

*I heard Ron Paul say this in some interview, and I liked it a lot.