Letters to the Editor
manyctnj
Published Letters: 456 Editor's Choice: 31
-
What's a Clinton supporter to say?
[Read the article: Campaign wrap]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm now torn between wanting to point out (for like my zillionth time in Salon postings) how NOT the candidate of change Mr. Obama really is but, on the other hand, feeling a little relieved that, in the unlikely event he is the Democratic nominee, he at least has someone in his campaign who knows how to try to win in November.
-
[Head shaking in disgust]
[Read the article: The race for California]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anonymous -- You're entitled to vote any way you please. But don't try to insult our intelligence by pretending that there is any principled basis for voting for Barack in the primary but voting Republican in the fall if HRC is the Democratic candidate. Only a fool could support Obama AND McCain (much less Obama and Romney). Their policies, who they are likely to appoint to the Supreme Court, where they are likely to lead the country are so profoundly different. So, by all means, feel free to use your vote to register your irrational, bumper-sticker hatred of HRC -- your kids will pay for your McCain vote (oh, please god tell me you're not actually a parent...)
-
Good choices all
[Read the article: Undecided '08: Should I vote for Clinton or Obama?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm an HRC supporter, but I liked John Edwards too. If you're going to pick a message, eradicating poverty is a pretty compelling one. I like that it was a policy message rather than a style message, so that it invited comparisons and debate with other candidates based on policy. Style is so....subjective. It causes people to have such strong emotional reactions for and against that it's impossible at times to have an intelligent conversation. And, of course, since I'm not above being completely shallow, he is damn cute.
I also liked the fact that Edwards ran for president in 2004 and when he didn't get the nomination, he settled for the vp slot on the ticket. That shows a certain team-spiritedness that I doubt we will see with either of the 2 current front runners, Wolf Blitzer's dream ticket fantasy notwithstanding.
But I also feel at the end of the day that we've had 3 really strong top contendors in the Democtratic party this year. I can and will support either Hillary or Barrack in the fall. I don't think enough people are saying that right now. All of this rampant Hillary hatred is really troubling.
-
The party needs to wrap up the party...
[Read the article: Goodbye, Super Tuesday]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lord knows it's been huge fun, but I'm completely exhasuted and really getting over this whole nominating process. And, you know, as a country we collectively all need to get up in the morning, so I think it's time to grab our coats and head for the door while we're all still mostly in one piece and no one has said or done anything completely stupid...yet...
I've come to the conclusion that what the party and the country need in November is for a Clinton-Obama (yes, in that order) ticket to be finalized by March 15th, and for John Edwards to play a prominent role in the campaign and be publicly promised a prominent role in the administration. How 'bout attorney general? Imagine what an activist AG like John Edwards could accomplish while Hillary occupies herself trying to restore some dignity to the US abroad and Barack uses his considerable oratorical and political skills pushing through a domestic agenda. Wow. Just wow. I see that team as a winner. I see other potential teams as... well... potentially not.
There is no reason why these 3 people, who have collectively captured the imagination of a huge chunk of this country, and whose policy differences are really very small, shouldn't unite to win the bigger prize. They are all amazingy strong candidates. A divided (read, divisive) convention this summer will turn off voters in droves and fuel the GOP. What it would take is Barack agreeing to take second seat, Hillary pledging to make Barack a real force in her administration (i.e., Cheney-like, not Gore-like) and all three subordinating their egos (and Bill's) to a common cause.
I pray someone other than me is thinking this way...
-
"Present" accounted for
[Read the article: "Present" tension ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The "present" votes never were objectionable to me. What is objectionable is pretending that Obama is a candidate of change when he engages in the same kind of horsetrading, strategic voting, pulling of punches, and preservation of deniability that Hillary is accused of. In other words, he's a politician, and more particularly, a legislator.
-
Mr. Candidate of Change
[Read the article: Who won Super Tuesday?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The first real test of whether Mr. Obama is truly above fractious, divisive politics will be whether he avoids irreparably dividng his own party by accepting a second position on the ticket in November.
-
Polarize this
[Read the article: Who won Super Tuesday?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]jb17 --
Rather than simply repeating the sexist canard that Hillary "polarizes" people but Obama brings people together, why not try to analyze what's to like and and what's not to like about each candidate on their own merits, and then vote for the candidate who you think will do the best job? I can assure you there are as many people whose votes will matter in November who have as strongly positive feelings for or against Barack as they do for or against Hillary.
In the end, you get one vote. Everyone gets one vote. You can only cast the vote FOR a candidate or choose to stay home. It just doesn't matter whether you like that candidate more than next one, or hate the other candidate more than the one your voting for. You get to choose one person or choose not to choose.
I think the freak shows in the world who say things like "if Hillary wins, I'll vote Republican" or "if McCain wins, I'm voting for Hillary" are really, really small in number, and probably cancel each other out in the end, notwithstanding that the press loves to overemphasize their importance.