The other day I was trying to say that Obama has substance and hope while Clinton only has substance. Here, Andrew Sullivan puts it much better than I. With respect to the idea that Obama is lacking in substance he writes:
"I find this criticism bewildering. Obama has a host of policy positions, on taxes, healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan, immigration, climate change, and this blog has mentioned or debated many of them. There seems to be a meme that because someone is inspiring, there has to be no substance. But they are not mutually exclusive categories. In the Democratic race, the only real substantive difference is healthcare mandates, which I've aired a great deal. And compared with McCain, Obama is a wonk."
Sullivan wrote more about Obama's substance here.
