Obama, in my opinion, is a man of mystery. I don't think we have a clue who he really is. If he is elected I believe we will be horrified to find out who he really is - and we will learn it the hard way.
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I am honestly curious about this position. He's given numerous interviews, participated in almost 2 dozen debates with Clinton and other democrats and published details plans on his web site. He's also given detailed speeches on many of his policy position from the economy, to the environment , to foreign policy, to the role of religion in public life. I feel like I know far more about where he stands and how he think than any other candidate.
He's been consistent in his positions when McCain seemed to waver. For instance, he talked about bank regulations 6 months ago when McCain was pushing further deregulation. Suddenly McCain supports better regulations as well. He's talked about open an efficient government and passed laws at the state and federal level that are consistent with that.
Perhaps this is a generational thing, with gen-xers and millennials more likely to accept his perhaps somewhat less traditional path? Perhaps it is a regional thing? I believe that Obama's politics are connected more to the New England region (and places where the descendants of New England have settled) than any other. Consensus building rather than divisiveness is more common in that region. I believe this could lead to Obama looking wish washy on issues to people of other regions when in reality he is a consensus builder who is able to build consensus across disparate groups while not sacrificing the essence of what he is trying to accomplish.
An interesting pattern I noticed about realignments tied into the secular pattern, alternating North and South every cycle as well as liberal then conservative (the conservative movement being a backlash to an awakening based strongly in the other region). The current southern dominated Republican party and the strong religious right movement seems the backlash to the boomer awakening in the late 60's. Now if the pattern holds a northern liberal dominated crisis should result....1789
Initially a mix of parties, ending in the Jeffersonian
Democratic-Republican party (southern liberalism
Democracy (Southern Conservatism
) - Simultaneous northern liberal uprising (transcendental etc) 1860
Republican (Northern Liberal
Republican (Northern Conservative
) Simultaneous southern populist movement/northern minority worker movement 1932
Democratic (Southern Libera
l [with component of northern minorities]) 1968
Republican (Southern Conservative
) Simultaneous northern liberal uprising (counterculture) 2008
Democratic (Northern Liberal