Carville endorses Obama!

Very much in spite of himself, James Carville, writing in today's Financial Times, has put his finger on why Barack Obama must be the Democratic nominee. After detailing how the nomination fight has divided the Democrats' constituent groups, he defines the winner's task this way:

As President George W. Bush could tell you, it is one thing to call yourself a uniter, it is another to actually unite people. For the Democratic nominee, it is going to be one demanding, difficult job requiring an inordinate amount of patience and skill. But then again, that is what a president has to do.

Which candidate has that "patience and skill"? Let's turn to David Brooks, also writing on May 6:

Obama still possesses his talent for homeostasis, the ability to return to emotional balance and calm, even amid hysteria. His astounding composure has come across as weakness in the midst of combat with Clinton, but it’s also at the core of his promise to change politics. He vows to calm hatred and heal division.

Then listen to the candidates themselves. Compare this

I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That’s in my DNA. Trying to promote mutual understanding, to insist that we all share common hopes, and common dreams, as Americans and as human beings. That’s who I am, that’s what I believe, that’s what this campaign has been about.

With this:

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is waving her fists across Indiana, signing autographs on boxing gloves.“We need a president who’s a fighter again,” Mrs. Clinton said at a rally on Thursday, adding that the next president must understand what it is like to “get knocked down and get back up: that’s the story of America, right?”

Could it be that even hyperpartisan James Carville, in up to his...waist in macho one-upsmanship, yearns to be free at last from the Clinton war machine?

Related posts:
Hillary's snarl is like an umbrella
Changing "the rules" on Clinton