That said, it's unlikely that Obama would plunge our military into another war. It would be a horrendously stupid thing to do...
If he did, I seriously doubt anyone would object. Everyone loves the guy. If he were to "pull an Iraq" so to speak, I think he'd be painted as a great war president by the media and his approval ratings would skyrocket and remain so for as long as we were in said war.
And in all honesty, nobody even knows what he'd do. There's no prior history to show for him. For that matter, can anyone explain to me why they even like Obama, excluding anything at all having to do with being "inspirational?" How well he speaks is irrelevant to how well positioned he is to bring about real, actual change and results; so far he hasn't proven he's able to do so. I vote on who has the best views on the issues, and the most experience to carry those views forward; not on who delivers the greatest speech, which is, I fear, the main reason most of America--especially younger voters--are supporting the guy: he sounds great, so he must be great. 
While I could plunge into an agry tirade as to why inspiration and words matter to the well being of a functioning society. I'll spare the both of us, I'm much too tired at this time of the morning. Instead, I'll just point out a few things:
- Clinton, who is supposed to be the queen of the universal health care, has accepted over 850,000$ in donantions from the health industry. I also dislike the fact that her health care plan mandates coverage. It's impractical to enforce and sounds like something an authoritarian socialist would manifest to solve the health care crisis. Obama's plan is not only far more feasible, but is also founded on the integrity of not having been manipulated by the health industry.
- I do not trust Clinton to work to bring the war to an end in a timely manner. Whether or not she has been genuinely fooled by George W. Bush, she has still consistently voted to give the president a blank check for his imperialist actions in Iraq. To believe that she is truly committed to ending the Iraq war would require the willing suspention of disbelief. Obama, having been right on the Iraq conquest from the beginning, could be more so trusted to work to bring about an end to war.
- Obama has not taken any PAC or special interest money. It would be nice to have a president who wasn't an investment for the corporations and money shakers.
With all of that said, what's an issue that Clinton has tackled in great detail that Obama hasn't? If there is one, I would like to know. Clinton isn't the brilliant policy wonk that you seem to think she is, nor is Obama the clueless dolt that you seem to think he is.
