Andrew Bacevich made a very convincing argument for voting for Obama who is more likely than either McCain or Hillary to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and bring an end to the neoconservative reign in Washington. It’s also important to take into consideration that we are probably going to end with a large Democratic majority in Congress which will place a veto on any attempt by a Republican President to advance any important conservative agenda (which in any case, McCain isn’t planning to do). My guess is that if we had a parliamentary system in this country, the (imaginary) small conservative-libertarian party which like the (imaginary) Green party could tip the balance in favor of one of the two big parties in the (imaginary) American parliament would probably decide to support the party leading a coalition committed to a withdrawal from Iraq. That is basically what a vote for Obama means in practical terms. It’s not a long-term strategic alliance based on common ideological goals but a rational decision that one makes under pressure (Iraq) and based on incomplete information (on Obama).