not enough people point this out:

He does have one major asset in my view.... his wife Michelle.

She is awesome.  ON top of that She even dresses great!

As for the part I don't agree with, well lets skip that for now.

But they're not his pinnacle; he'll deliver better speeches in the future.

I think with this speech tonight he grounded himself more than he ever has in the center of the Democratic party.

And I think this part was where he began to "elevate" his rhetoric, to borrow the word that Ezra Klein used tonight.

This was the moment when we tore down barriers that have divided us for far too long - when we rallied people of all parties and ages to a common cause; when we finally gave Americans who'd never participated in politics a reason to stand up and do so.

Then he continued with what is now his standard message of "hope." But he refined it towards the end, and In my estimation elevated his message even higher:

Hope is what led me here today - with a father from Kenya; a mother from Kansas; and a story that could only happen in the United States of America. It is the bedrock of this nation; the belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.

That's good, and noble, and salutary for this country.

His closing was familiar, but benefited from what came before. It was moving:

That is what we started here in Iowa, and that is the message we now carry to New Hampshire and beyond; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down; the one that can change this country brick by brick, block by block, calloused hand by calloused hand - that together, ordinary people can do extraordinary things; because we are not a collection of Red States and Blue States, we are the United States of America; and at this moment, in this election, we are ready to believe again.

True leadership is a rarity indeed in America today.  Leadership requires two things, belief in oneself, and the courage to trust those you propose to lead with the truth.  And Obama has these qualities in spades.  Give the American people a taste genuine leadership, and they'll never settle for anything less.

As I listened to the speeches of the other contenders, Clinton, Edwards, Huckabee, McCain and Romney, their voices seem to grow small and insignificant, fading into the political obscurity that their futures surely have in store for them.  And I have little doubt that the American people could hear this as well.

And 35% of the women's vote, to Hillary Clinton's 30%

Obama's vague rhetoric about hope and change leave me cold. I've seen too many politicians mouth those platitudes and then, after winning, find themselves either unable to enact any meaningful policy or enact policies I strongly disagree with.

I'm for Clinton for the same reason that you are -- I believe she'd be able to implement the policy changes both here and abroad that would improve both the economy and the international situation.

But a Democrat is better than a Republican. That's the bottom line. I'll take Obama if he's the nominee.

My question is that you say Obama rallied the youth vote, and that is clearly true. How can Hillary or John Edwards overcome that? If Obama can get the people out, especially the youth where he holds a distinct advantage, in ways the others cannot, why do you say you do not believe he will win the nomination? Who can overcome him with that going for him?