It's hard enough being a Clinton supporter on a college campus these days. But put that campus in a state whose two senators and governor have endorsed Obama, and add to that the backing of the Tufts Daily as well as a zealous Students for Obama group, and it can feel downright persecutory.
Not only do I - along with my fellow 1990s-loving, hope-bashing skeptics - spend the majority of our time defending Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), but we have to feel like crotchety old curmudgeons doing it.
Gail Collins of the New York Times put it best when she wrote, "Barack is making Clintonites feel like an elderly aunt who won't let the kids play their newfangled music in the talent show." It's true. Now I know what it feels like to be a college Republican.
Case in point. The other day I was walking across our lovely wooded academic quad when I spotted a friend in the distance. Now, me and this friend - we'll call him Bill (pun very intended) - aren't great friends, but we've had a class or two together and exchange pleasantries every so often. In other words, he isn't the type of person I would normally race across the quad to engage.
But this day was different. See, Bill is a fellow Clintonista. A "hope"-hating comrade. Emboldened by the rare prospect of a Hillary-love fest, I beelined across the quad and stopped Bill in his tracks. We had a great conversation about how brilliant she was in the debate last week, the superiority of her health plan and Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama.
It's a rare moment in the life of a college Clintonite to be able to praise our candidate without having to simultaneously defend her. My God, it felt good. I didn't even have to whisper.
Listen, don't get me wrong; I get the "hope" thing. I worked on Deval Patrick's campaign in 2006, a campaign whose messages of curbing cynicism, fighting the insiders and uniting the electorate are eerily similar to those of 'Bamamania 2K8. The thing about the Patrick campaign, though, was that he offered more than just hope, unity and a bunny rabbit for every family. His policy views were consistently left of - and more sensible than - those of his Democratic rivals on energy policy, education and gay rights. It was hope plus.
With Obama, whose policy views are mostly identical to H-bomb's, all you get is hope. I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that, but I'm pretty sure you can't even smoke it.
Worst of all, though, I'm constantly racked with questions like: "If I'm 21 and don't support Obama, do I have a soul?" or "When can I expect to receive my Establishment membership card?" But thankfully, these lapses are temporary and I can usually reassert my Clinton pride.
I won't go into why I support Hillary, because let's face it, Super Tuesday has come and gone and most college liberals voted for Obama anyway. But I will say that though "hope" is an attractive word - especially to the college crowd - effectiveness is a better one. It may not fit quite as well on a campaign poster, but it's a winner. And it should be especially appealing to college liberals, because the degree to which the Democratic nominee can actually be effective in implementing policies has a monumental impact on the state of the country which we are going to inherit.
The most important lesson I learned from Governor Patrick's first year in office is that "hope" doesn't pass legislation. Hillary Clinton, insider that she is, is a brilliant mind who knows how the process works. I don't care how much Americans hate Washington, it's still going to be where the laws are made for the next four years.
Take Massachusetts. Who is the most powerful politician in the Commonwealth right now? It's Salvador Di Masi, the entrenched, back-room dealing, policy wonkish Democratic Speaker of the House. And who was it who passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Medicare/Medicaid? LBJ. Hardly a Washington newcomer. The point is, being both a passionate and entrenched liberal often works better for the cause than bashing the very establishment that put you in office - not to mention the one without which you will get nothing done.
Furthermore, what's all this nonsense about unity? It sounds good to an idealistic collegian, but it certainly doesn't go hand-in-hand with change. Progressive change doesn't come by cozying up with border vigilantes, gay-bashers and war hawks.
I don't want a president that everybody loves. I want a president that can push forward a liberal agenda, and if that means giving the finger to Johnny Republican, that's fine. Let's not forget that conservatives loathed FDR, much like the GOP of the 1990s hated Bill Clinton. It's a good thing.
So as much as I may yearn to feel the boundless optimism to which both my youth entitles me and which the Obama movement provides, I must abstain. The future of this country is too important to stake on wonderful yet empty words like "hope" and "unity."
I'll admit I get chills whenever I hear Obama talk. But then I think about a president who can actually implement truly universal healthcare, a sensible end to the Iraq War and policies that treat immigrants like human beings. Now, those are the type of goose bumps that aren't going away after the rally is over. And it's that desire for a transformational government - not just a transformational campaign - that I hope motivates my fellow young liberals now and in the future.
Doug Randall is a senior majoring in political science.
