During the campaign, ex-senator and former presidential candidate Mike Gravel had some really harsh words to say about the three then remaining Democratic candidates, with the hardest swings aimed for Obama. I’ve been really hoping that time would prove Gravel overly pessimistic. Today I’d like to rehash his remarks and give him my personal award for best cautionary prediction:

JAY: So, then, what do you make of Obama's promise of change and all the rhetoric that's been going along with his campaign?

GRAVEL: It's foolish. Foolish. Dangerous. Dangerous, because he doesn't even recognize that he can't deliver. That's dangerous... ...he raises greater expectations of the youth and can't deliver. And the worst thing a leader can do is raise expectations, and they don't happen. You create a whole new generation of cynics.

I don’t think we’ll see Gravel backpedalling on that statement any time soon. Not running for president again, either. As a citizen of a multi party parliamentary country, I get frustrated sometimes when I hear progressive American voters discouraged by the perceived lack of options. It’s not the whole truth. To be fair, the options are there, they’re just waiting for the popular support. When so many agree that both Democrats and Republicans represent their campaign donors more than their voters, but still dismiss the alternatives, it looks like a systemic irrationality of a sort.
 
A first on my political tweaks wishing list for America: Multi-turn presidential elections, like France etc. For example, most Nader voters of 2008 would have joined Al Gore on a second turn. Nader would have boosted his vote share but wouldn’t have been assigned any scapegoat or traitor to the higher cause of getting the lesser of two so-so’s – ironically for providing the choice many progressives ask for. Meanwhile everybody could have made an uncompromised voting statement in the first turn. And what more powerful poll than a presidential election anyway?