Letters to the Editor
softdog
Published Letters: 186 Editor's Choice: 8
-
I hope this is featured at some point.
[Read the article: The GOP on the verge of imploding]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Just for a few hours. Make it the featured article and give readers a break from the primary obsession.
-
To ittle lord baltimore and all who'd drag us down if they're person doesn't win
[Read the article: Will the Democrats flop in Denver?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a Obama supporter and people like you disgust me.
This also goes for Clinton supporters who'd scuttle the party if they don't get their way.
I'd want a political system where I wasn't dealing with the lesser of two evils, but as long as I'm stuck in this one I want to avoid the greater evil.
You'd support a 100 year war in Iraq, abortion bans and a hands off approach to economic collapse out of petulance. Your politics are motivated by deep personal loathing and an idea of perfection which Obama himself has not promised.
I find Obama well to the right of my own ideals, but I supported him because he's exhibits a great deal of sense. As does Clinton, despite all her centrist cronyism and negative campaigning.
Honestly, get past the temper tantrum and realize this nation is in crisis mode.
-
I should learn to spell
[Read the article: Will the Democrats flop in Denver?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's "their person" not "they're person". There goes any high ground I had left.
-
This Evil Nasty Voting Thing Angers The Media With Those Indecisive Commoners.
[Read the article: Whose fault is the Clinton-Obama stalemate?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Y'know, it was THE MEDIA who decided one of the candidates needed 2025 or howeverthefuck many delegates for a clear win.
It wasn't written in the rules.
It is THE MEDIA who, apparently because they are bored, have picked up the OH NOES LONG PRIMARY IS THE DOOMZ :p
Where is there even a single poll in which the voting populace is saying, "Why yes, I'd much rather have my voting discounted because two qualified candidates are neck and neck. That's exactly the best process."
And as far as I can see, the only people who think a long primary equals giving John McCain a free pass in the media is the media itself. Funny how that works.
The media keeps making excuses for the bullshit devisive narratives they are peddling.
Meanwhile, I suspect the superdelegates are waiting to see who finishes in the lead. Like sane people who respect the process.
I didn't vote for the media narrative. No one did.
So stop saying it's broken because your little cadre with the pixels and cameras can't dictate the ending just yet.
It's not even about bias anymore. It's The People vs. The Pundits.
Which
-
@ hatchshin and AJCalhoun
[Read the article: Whose fault is the Clinton-Obama stalemate?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm always making massive typos in my rants, but you two express the real problem with clarity. Honestly, it's depressing to read so few sane posts amongst the lunatics who insist everything is The Other Candidates Fault.
hatchshin:
"Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats are fielding two very popular candidates with very passionate supporters. This campaign has been ridiculously over-analyzed. Obama cannot attract Hillary supporters because she is a very strong candidate with her supporters and vice versa. What is so hard to figure out about that? Why should a Hillary supporter switch to Obama and why should an Obama supporter switch to Hillary?...The bottom line is that Hillary supporters and Obama supporters are not going to vote for McCain in the fall no matter what pundits might think, or they might threaten in the passion of the moment...The American press has an obsession with calling a winner in everything and anything (witness the sad example of College Football)..."
AJCalhoun:
"You know damn well it's a contest because it's a contest, because the two candidates have very different backgrounds which raise very different questions as to which would make the better President and appeal to very different demographics, and while both have no doubt made errors which, had they not made them, might have shortened the race, that's stuff that already happened, and here we are now, with a very interesting race that neither candidate could possibly leave without shaking the faith of roughly half the qualified electorate and a lot of other good and earnest people who have become caught up in this most historic nomination contest in our rather brief national history...There's no way we'd let this stop just because you guys who get paid to blather about it are bored. We're not, and we're who count."
-
I guess Joan makes an exception for herself
[Read the article: Keith Olbermann apologizes for his Clinton remark]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I hope I'm not the only one who finds it extremely disingenuous for Joan Walsh to be giving kudos to Keit Olbermann for responding to audience feedback.
Meanwhile Salon, and Joan in particular, blithely ignores reader responses, or references them in oblique, self-serving ways. Salon's default position is to say nothing, be it small thing - like that dreadful Kansas cartoon - or ongoing problems - like Camille Paglia - or major things - like Salon's relentless outrage mining on the primary and appearance of Clinton bias. Despite thousands of comments by now ranging from gentle critique to enraged, apparently Joan doesn't think this conversation is worth having.
I am not talking about an apology or major change, just admitting the issue is there and responding.
This is supposed to be the advantage of new media. Instead, Joan is running Salon in a way which out-olds old media.