Letters to the Editor
Brian - Seattle
Published Letters: 265 Editor's Choice: 8
-
lolcait
[Read the article: What Pennsylvania tells us]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The rules say the superdelegates can decide the nomination in favor of the candidate who has a better chance in the GE regardless of a slight pledged delegate lead by her opponent.
Sure. But when Terry McCaulif (sp) talks about the only thing that matters is the popular vote, and that Michigan and Florida will count (even though your candidate is quoted as saying they won't), and that caucuses are "undemocratic", then you have to wonder why we even bothered with these primaries. They are trying to change the rules in the 11th inning to gain the support of superdelegates and I consider that not clean or honest campaigning.
CNN.com reports 45% of PA Clinton voters said they would vote for McCain or stay home if Obama wins the nomination (26-19% respectively). Astounding.
I think your statistics are a little off. Maybe you can clarify.
From: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/22/exit.polls/index.html
But the contest appears to have left a bad taste in the mouth of many voters: Eleven percent of those voting in the Democratic race said they would vote for McCain over Clinton. Another 6 percent said they would stay home in a race between McCain and Clinton, the New York senator and former first lady.
Ten percent of Democrats said they would sit on their hands in a McCain-Obama race, and 15 percent said they would vote for McCain over the Illinois senator.
I saw similar statistics on Foxnews.
-
Hrm, forgot one of those </blockquote> thingy's
[Read the article: What Pennsylvania tells us]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]:p
-
Katetex
[Read the article: What Pennsylvania tells us]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No, Clinton had to fight back because she was losing. I remember when it happened. It happened right before Wisconsin and I remember Pat Buchanan talking about how she *had* to go negative because Obama beats her on a positive message matchup.
She's gained supporters? Where? Ohio and Pennsylvania you say? Those were her states to win with the exact same demographics she's done well with everywhere else. She hasn't gained enough supporters to change anything. If she did she'd be winning. This isn't spin, they are the facts of these contests.
I would love to see your proof of Obama degrading her. I could see "supporters" doing such a thing, but that all depends on who you put in that camp. In any case, I just don't see it. Maybe it's due to the koolaid clouding my vision?
-
ljwalker
[Read the article: What Pennsylvania tells us]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't see how your list suggests Obama is acting like he is entitled to the nomination. He's had to work pretty hard for what he has now don't you agree?
As far as the facts, I was referring to the voting demographics in Pennsylvania. They were the same groups (older, lower education, white) she has won more with elsewhere. To be fair, Obama won the same groups (black, college educated, affluent) as well. It simply was the best place (in addition to Ohio) that she could have picked up a victory.
Facts? These are facts? You gotta love Obama's followers: the minute the facts don't fit the argument they change the argument and/or conveniently shift it from one set of "facts" to another set! Talk about moving the goal post!
I'll sum up Obama's (and his followers) shifting sands rhetoric in one word: FEAR.
Why the assumption about what type of Obama supporter I am? Why this generalization of our two candidates? This is the type of stuff that is really getting to me. We need to not be tearing each other apart like this. I realize we are all passionate about our candidate (I'm not perfect either) but when the November election comes around is this what we'll do to McCain supporters? When someone tries to explain their opinion you'll come off with these types of remarks too? That type of action is only going to alienate anyone that is interested in switching sides and push them even further from supporting our candidate. This type of polarization is not what is needed right now and I really hope we can all begin to come together a bit more.
-
ljwalker
[Read the article: What Pennsylvania tells us]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No worries. I totally get that way too :p
On the other piece of your letter, however, I really do need to ask: Why can't Obama pick up these core Democratic voters? Once is bad luck; twice is bad strategy; three times is a trend.
Well, the opposite is also a question to ask. Why can't Hillary pick up blacks, the youth and more educated voters?
Maybe this is the issue that is really the problem. Both camps have their supporters (as much as I hate splitting people into demographic camps) and they aren't budging for whatever reason. Then the term "winning" changes among the campaigns because it has to. Without either candidate making any inroads of the other's then anything that can be done will be to try and get to those voters.
Now there are some anomalies here and there. Wisconsin wasn't really an Obama state in terms of demographics for example. (I could be wrong here).
I'm not sure what to make of it all but I'm really tiring of this race. Nothing is changing in any meaningful way. No voting blocks are moving, no momentum is changing. This is not good because the debate goes to the fringes and focus on gaffes and blunders or some supporter the candidate had 10 years ago. It's too bad where we are and what it's forcing our candidates to do to each other.
To be perfectly honest, I would like Hillary to be winning or have some real chance at winning. Right now the only option is for the supers to fully support her, and that is a very difficult case to make considering their own political futures.
But in this case, they could come together and make that unstoppable ticket as Bill talked about. Use Hillary's clout and experience to mold Obama for a 2016 run where he would be well known and have plenty of experience in the best place to get it. That's a ticket I could fully support.