Obama is bringing 2, maybe 3 garden hoses.  Edwards is the only one who wants to bring a fire truck or 2.

I used to like Obama a lot after he gave a speech in 2004.  But then after he said something like he decided to run for President because he believed he was capable of doing it, I started to wonder what he believes in, himself or some ideal.

Then the more he talks, the more I see him like sugar candy.  The only thing you can be sure about sugar candy is that it is sweet.  However, it can be shaped to anything and it is fluffy with more air than substance.  It is better used as a bait than as a weapon to fight.

Unfortunately, this is our last chance to fight for ourselves and for future generations, not listening to sugary promises which offend nobody.

is the more dangerous to the change agenda.  On one hand Clinton is highly likely to tinker around the edges.  Policy adjustments really.  But we know this.  Her real danger imho is in the war mentality/overcompensation.  One war with Iran and any hope of change is gone for the foreseeable future.  No money, no focus, no national will.  Kind of a scare and conquer scenario, politically by the money interests.

Obama on the other hand is exactly a you say, imho as well.  He says the words, but seems to be too eager to get along with everyone.  I see this as the potential setup for a scenario where DLC types say, "We tried it your way [progressives], and it didn't work.  So STFU and now we're gonna do it our way!"  All backed up by the money interests of course.  But the net result is no change for the foreseeable future, or until something really bad happens.

Either way no meaningful change is likely, in the improbably event that either becomes the candidate.  ;^)

Perhaps this is overthinking it, but your comment hit the proverbial nail.

FWIW.