For all the people who supported Obama from the very beginning (before his first big $$$ haul), may I ask why?
I'll answer from the point of view of a swing voter, one who had favorite Republicans and least favorite Republicans, and favorite Democrats and least favorite Democrats, and from one willing to vote for others if both Democrats and Republicans had nominated an unacceptable candidate: I liked him early on for several reasons. (By "early on" I mean winter 2006/07, although you could find posters who supported him long before that.)
For one thing, he opposed the war. Ron Paul did as well. There were others, but few were historically consistent about this. (At least Edwards was honest about changing his mind, but Edwards is ideologically very far to my left and wouldn't likely have won my vote in the general election even if I didn't like the Republican nominee. I think you could say that about many of the Democrats.)
Also, I know you're not supposed to vote for a candidate based on ethnicity, but I really loved his name. Obama is so exotic. And Barrack means "blessed" in Arabic. (basically, like the Hebrew "baruch") And then I read somewhere that his name was Hussein, and that really clinched it. Funny thing, some Republicans kept reminding everyone that his name was Barack Hussein, and that both those names are arabic, almost as if they wanted to lose. I still don't get their strategy. If ever we needed a president with an Arabic name, this is the time. You may think that's probably as silly as voting for, or against, a candidate as gender, sexual orientation, or religion, but I don't. I think there are sound geopolitical reasons that a candidate named Barack--especially one with a butterscotch skin tone and black eyes reminiscent of the deep, dark eyes of the one hundred virgins you get to lay once you go to heaven for keeping the faith--would have an advantage over most others. Of course, Ayman al-Zawahiri wasted no time in calling Obama, along with Rice and Powell, a “house negro” in a message on militant websites today, and said that Obama's “the direct opposite of honorable black Americans” like Malcolm X. But I think that the fact that al Zawahiri felt the need to make such a comment at all gives some credence to my theory.
He also said lots of things that I'd posted for a long time. At least early in the campaign, before he started getting a little nasty with Clinton and then with McCain (perhaps by way of defense in kind), he would talk about post-partisanism and transcending the impracticality of stubborn ideology.
Also, he was the first black guy who sounded like he did. I know Howard Dean and Joe Biden got into trouble for saying this, and I don't respect Howard or Joe much to begin with, but I'm going to go out on a limb and repeat it, because although his choice of phrasing was perhaps awkward, I took his point, and I agreed with it. "I mean, you got the first, sorta, main-stream African-American. Clean, articulate, and bright black guy. That's a story book, man." Awkward, and a bit funny, but take his point. Let's be honest: It does promote some healing to have a black president. I'm not saying you should vote for a guy just because he's black (or just because he's white or red or yellow or brown), but having a black president does give us some evidence that we're a bit closer to the ideal state we'd like to think we were. But we were never really offered one that wasn't playing victim, or wearing a turban, or going on about reparations, or The Man, or doing a million other things to go out of his way to show that he wasn't really into being a president for all people. But Obama actually came out and said that he didn't want to be president of a "red America or a blue America, but just the united states of America." He could have said, "redneck America or blue-blood America," or "lavender America and pink America" or he could have chosen any combination of colors or ideas. He happened to pick two coded color words that the newsies (over)use, and it would of course be taken as "Bush counties" (Red America) versus "Kerry counties" (Blue America) by the talking heads. But the message was much broader, and it was clear to me: "I ain't runnin' to be HNIC. I'm just running for President. Can you get past the fact that I'm black and look at me as a man? I'm not asking for your vote, just for you to hear me out, and take me seriously as a candidate. If you like what I say, then follow me. If not, then there will be no hard feelings. Just don't lump me in with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Or with George Wallace and David Duke, for that matter." At least that's how I heard it.
Also, as has been pointed out, I was sort of looking for a decent Democrat to get behind, and the media-annointed frontrunner at the time was Hillary Clinton, whom I neither trust nor respect. And most of the others have obvious failings. For example, Kucinich & Edwards are leftist/populist and I equate their vision with economic disaster, fairly or unfairly. Richardson is a total bore and pretty much a one-note candidate who campaigns by reliving glory days like a high school linebacker turned overweight couch-potato ("did I mention that I was a special envoy to Somalia?"). Dodd's big eyebrows are just way too distracting for me to take him seriously. Biden was a bit seazy for my tastes. (Jmfcst called him a "smiley hitman." I have to agree. Odd that Obama would choose him, but as we have all admitted before, we don't vote for vice-presidents, but rather for presidents, and to say that the choice of Biden would put me off Obama would come off as silly as those who blame Palin for McCain's defeat.) Gravel seems a bit like Perot's vice presidential running mate, not quite sure of where he is or what he's doing there. Not very inspiring.
And, speaking of inspiring, that's probably the biggest reason of all, his oratory style always inspired me. Reagan was like that as well. Of course, I was too young to vote for him, but I always made it a point to go out of my way to piss off my parents (both of whom were die-hard, pro-welfare, anti-Vietnam War, anti-capital punishment, pro-Union Democrats, 70s style) by telling them how much I enjoyed hearing Reagan talk. But to be honest, it wasn't all just teenage rebellion. Sure, becoming a Republican was mostly my form of rebellion, but liking Reagan's speeches was genuine. No, I don't agree with Reagan all of the time, just as I don't agree with Obama all the time, but I do like a man who knows what I need to hear, and knows when I'm feeling down, and can talk sweetly to me--even if just for a little while--before he rolls over on his pillow and falls asleep and dreams of another. Who wouldn't want to be with such a man?
