Matt Yglesias smugly writes:

This is a presidential primary after all. Chris Dodd's already won my vote for Senate Majority Leader should the position come open. It seems to me that Obama needs to convince people that he would have a different, better Iran policy were he too become president and not that he has a better view of how he hypothetically would have handled Senate votes were he to have actually been in DC on the day of the vote.

I find that comment smugly . . . well, stupid. Obama, a sitting Senator, "needs to convince people that he would have a different, better Iran policy" and his performance as SENATOR is deemed irrelevant to that persuasion by Yglesias. I mean, honestly. Is Yglesias really such a believer in position papers that actual POSITIONS taken in ACTUAL VOTES are deemed irrelevant by him? I'm sorry, that is just irritatingly ignorant it seems to me.

On top of it all, Yglesias seems ignorant of the fact the Clinton campaign was pointing out - that Obama (and yes, my man Dodd too) favored designating the Iran Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization in the Fall of 2006, making their criticism of Clinton's vote on Kyl-Lieberman a bit nonsensical. But of course, if your view is that what someone does as Senator is irrelevant to their Presidential campaign, then it makes its own twisted sense. But then, you have to ignore Clinton's (and Dodd's) vote in favor of war with Iraq in 2002. But then, Yglesias favored the Iraq War at the time. So his position maybe does make sense for him.