I relish the presidency of any of the likely Democratic nominees.  

Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and the others have differences in tactical approaches and policy emphasis; skills and experiences, i.e. in the details.  

The make-ups of the baskets of attributes are different, but they are each excellent baskets.  If we don't let ourselves suffer from the narcissism of small differences we can see how well our policies fare under each of these potential presidents.

The agonized choice is between great and greater.

This is what we face as Democrats.  This is why the support for the top three is so evenly divided.

Republicans also face an agonizing choice - for the opposite reason - which choice is least egregious?

This situation was starkly apparent in a recently published comment by a Utah Republican (or satirist):