Sullivan posts an interesting theory:

Traditional liberalism is moribund; and Bush and Rove have destroyed conservatism as a coherent governing philosophy. It’s obvious from this blog that I too find Ron Paul and Barack Obama by far the most interesting candidates. Not because I agree with them on everything. But because they alone represent the courage to move past the past. The rest seems exhausted to me.

I absolutely agree with that. I just don’t know that the public is prepared to move past the labels and the brands of the past; we are beholden to our “teams,” as I pointed out a while back.

But I suspect thinking people who vote and consider their political alignment not on the basis of tribalism but rationality cannot help but come to the conclusion that the current situation is bankrupt. Which is, again, one of the reasons I dislike Hillary; she represents a continuity that I think is a mistake, particularly now. What the country needs now is new definitions; and her interpretation of this is bland centrism, a Democrat who acts like a Republican on national security but, you know, wants health insurance for all. It’s not enough.