An understandable “undercurrent of anxiety”
The Washington Post asks why the presidential contest is so tight that the race is essentially tied today:
As the Democrats kicked off a convention designed to unite support behind Obama, interviews with several dozen delegates pointed to an undercurrent of anxiety among many from key swing states who will be charged with leading the push in their communities. They expressed doubts bordering on bewilderment: Why, in a year that had been shaping up as a watershed for Democrats, amid an economic downturn and an unpopular Republican presidency, is the race so tight? The sentiment is strongest among former supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, though it is not limited to them.
GOP mega-cheerleader Hugh Hewitt thinks he has a couple of explanations, and maybe they are valid. But we’re not sure you even have to delve far into Senator Obama’s ideology to see an adequate explanation for his weakness as a candidate. His youth and inexperience suffice to explain his weakness. (Of course if Senator Obama does very well in the debates and Senator McCain does poorly, it is possible for him to win the election. That aside, a media frenzy and fad created by an ad man has a short half life.)
Think about this: most people have someone whom they know or with whom they work, a relative perhaps, who has a thicker résumé and a longer list of achievements than the Democratic presidential candidate. Consider this: if history were different and Senator Obama had decided this year to run to become governor of Illinois, would he have been given rock-star status? Could his Republican opponent have run against him as “too inexperienced” to govern the Prairie State?