Letters to the Editor
MaddieP
Published Letters: 708 Editor's Choice: 9
-
@Jameka
[Read the article: The rubes and the elites]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually it would help if you READ THE ARTICLE.
The posts one here actually have little to do with what was written directly. The posters will talk about what they want - and they want to argue about this latest "event".
The crux was about the broader issue of the cultural divide in the democratic party. I think THAT would be an interesting issue to discuss but alas, Salon is not the place apparently to have a reasoned discussion about anything except whichever scandal is racking the Democratic candidates.
Pity.
Problem is we dems have two VERY different consituencies - we tend to have the secularists, intellectuals and hose who are sometimes called elitists. One the other hand we have generally liberal but more "traditional" voters who, as Obama said and everyone acknolwedges, live in a different place than Manhattan and San Francisco.
Our problem is that a lot of the dems who are from those more traditional places, have a lot common with what we consider to be the traditional Right-wing in America. And the right wing has siphoned off their votes away from democrats before based on some of those similarities. That doesn't mean they are stupid or low-information.
The democrat's challenge is to somehow appeal in earnest to these voters as well as the "other camp". This is not an easy task since on the face of it they can appear so different. The challenge is to get each group to understand that although this one side maybe believes in evolution and not god, and the other side likes to hunt deer and go to bible study, we SHARE the same policy goals.
This is a tough task that if not accomplished will allow the right wing to steal small town voters using the commonalities they share. This is the reality and we as democrats have to figure out how to deal with it. We can;t keep breezing into these towns with pandering and NOT delivering or we'll lose them forever. On the other hand we cannot pretend that they have the same outlook and lifestyles as the Berkeley crowd. They don't and its not wrong to take note of that fact.
WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT HOW TO DO DO THIS. WE'RE NOT. WE'RE STILL ARGUING ABOUT THE MEANING OF THE WORD BITTER AND ELITIST AND WHICH PART OF THE STATEMENT WAS F**KED UP OR WHY OBAMA SUCKS OR HILLARY SUCKS OR WHATEVER. ITS STUPID.
I'll tell you what I'm getting BITTER about Salon.
-
@Ana
[Read the article: The rubes and the elites]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I typically don't respond to you or your posts but i think we had one reasonable exchange in the past so...her goes
Listen, here's teh truth. Neither Obama NOR Clinton can win in the general without the other persons' key supporters. I;ve said this before and i still feel that way now.
REALITY CHECK
If Clinton heads the ticket, especially without the majority of delegates (hey she MAY have an argument for electability and the supers may buy it - that's fine I'm not arguing that here), she HAS to get the youth and black votes back as well as the so-called elitist vote. Why? Becuase the right wing will finally be mobilized against her (not so much FOR McCain). She'll need all her voters PLUS all the young new voters and the black voters who typically don't vote that seem to be voting for Barak. WHY? McCain will run an appealing campaign. He'll dupe alot of people and the repubs will be out in force - so dems will need a lot of people to win.
How can she do it? Put Obama on the ticket. In my opinion it would be a Dem landslide at that point.
Similarly, Obama would have to mobilize Hillary support base which, may not be easy to do after this debacle -we'll see how the primaries go in PA. If he takes a hit in PA and other similar states, I think this incident with Obama has done one thing mainly: it may force his hand to choose (or seriously consider) Hillary IF he winds up with the nomination.
Neither can win in November with a divided Democratic party. I know you;d like that (why else would you take such glee in the percentage of supposed Hillary Democrats who say they would not vote for Obama under any circumstances? Most dems say they will vote dem. Just sayin')
-
@Ana
[Read the article: The rubes and the elites]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wasnt trying to argue with you. As i mentioned, i only responded because i thought, "Hey Ana CAN be reasonable so..."
We agree that they both meed each other's consititency. I am an Obama supporter and i have valid reasons for that as well. It all boils down to what you think is MOST important, that's all.
My concern is the number you threw out there - that 44% thing and the other assertion about an equal number of Obama supporters who say the same thing. I haven't seen it, don't know if its true. Also don't know how much of that we can take seriously given the heated contest and the feelings we have for NOW as opposed to how we all SHOULD feel when looking down the barrel of a McCain administration.
Bottom line: think both candidates have serious electability issues (she for the reasons i stated and he for the reasons you stated) unless they are together. If they are together in either combo BO/HC or HC/BO they stand a chance but without that, i think it will be a challenge for either of them. Sadly.
-
WES
[Read the article: The rubes and the elites]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]He said he and Hillary were friends before and would remain friends after...that wasn't true. At least I hope not. :P