<b>Editorial:</b> Obama it is

In contrast, Mrs Clinton showed that despite all the talk of her being the more experienced candidate, she was the one who made the mistakes on both message and organisation. She misread the voters' desire for change, she under-estimated who she was up against, she never conceived of the possibility that another candidate would be able to outspend her, she switched personalities through the campaign, her husband became a liability instead of an asset, she assumed an early victory and therefore did not plan financially for the second half of her campaign (in which, though, she did better than she did at the start), and she had to dump her key staff members when the going got rough. Also, it seemed quite often that her own ambition and personality were the main issue ("I'm in it and I am in to win," she declared when announcing her candidature 18 months ago), and therefore did not offer enough to voters until the later stages when she struck a chord with white, working-class voters. She has proved a point by winning about the same number of popular votes as Mr Obama, but in pitching for becoming the vice-presidential nominee, she has raised through her conduct the question of whether she will be happy playing second fiddle.