Letters to the Editor
-
@AnaHadWolves (2)
AnaHadWolves: "As a life-long Democrat, I'm turned off by the coterie of Obama sycophants who direct crassness, rudeness and vitriol at other Democratic candidates and their supporters."
The irony is palpable, as your entire message is a prime example of such syncophantery, crassness and rudeness. You are projecting your own qualities onto others.
Here's a sincere question: If you are such a big Clinton supporter, why not simply write a message extoling all her virtues? Why focus all your energies on trying to make totally FAKE accusations against her opponent? For somebody who claims to be a lifelong Democrat, you're acting exactly like a Republican!
AnaHadWolves: "They can't believe that another candidate just might have more real experience, be a better President or have an easier time defeating the Republicans than Obama."
Maybe people "can't believe" that the other candidate is better because they've examined both candidates carefully and made an intelligent decision based on legitimate reasoning?
I prefer Obama, but I don't go around telling Clinton supporters that they're completely invalid and that they're deluded and so on. At least, not the ones who show signs of basic level-headedness and decency. I do believe there are a lot of Clinton supporters who legitimately believe that she's the best candidate and I don't begrudge them their right to believe that, or try to question their intelligence for it. So why are you trying to do that for Obama supporters?
I think the "more experience" question is debatable. Hillary Clinton has "more experience" in exactly the same way that any human who is older than any other human has "more experience." It's not the quantity of experience, it's the quality. Hillary Clinton's prime experience outside of being First Lady was 16 years working to promote the interests of large corporations. I am sure that gave her experience, but I question whether it's the kind of experience we want in the White House. Hillary Clinton's Senate experience is not stellar and she made most of her moves with one eye on the White House, including a key move -- her vote to authorize war with Iraq -- that gave us a really revealing glimpse into Clinton's failings of leadership. If Clinton's obesiance to the prevailing wisdom during that vote is any indication, then we should regard her fitness for Commander-in-Chief status with suspicion, at the least.
As for the question of whether Obama would have a harder time defeating the Republican nominee, poll after poll has shown that Obama has more crossover appeal to Republicans, Independents, moderates, etc. I keep wondering how so many Clinton supporters conveniently forget this fact, all the while trying to state their opinion that Hillary would do better as if it's a undeniable truth.
AnaHadWolves: "In any event, Obama will have to win over Republicans, Independents...and, Democrats...to win in November. So far, he's turning off a huge swath of Democrats; let's see him win without us."
Be honest -- you never gave him a chance in the first place. You threw your hat in with Hillary before the hat even spent any time near your brain.
Sorry for being a little snipey, but I am getting really tired of all these trumped-up, fake arguments against Obama's candidacy. By and large he's run a very above-board campaign. Neither candidate is squeaky clean, but he's done well playing to his strengths and avoiding the negative campaigning unless (for the most part) it has been dished out to him first. You might argue this, and that's fine. I only ask that you hold Obama and Clinton to an equal set of standards. Can you do that much?
-
@Ana
I'm kind of disappointed by this...
They can't believe that another candidate just might have more real experience, be a better President or have an easier time defeating the Republicans than Obama.
It feels like you're projecting, Ana. As ever, I ask Clintonites to tell me how Clinton can win in the general, what the strategy is. Obama's able to draw some Republicans, most Democrats, tons of independents -- Clinton is able to draw most Democrats, and that's it.
How can she possibly have an easier time defeating McCain without drawing in independents?? And that doesn't even factor in the heavy negatives around Clinton, how many Republicans will vote against her. What is the Clintonian strategy for it? The polls show Obama beating McCain in the general, and Clinton either barely beating McCain, tying, or losing to him.
In any event, Obama will have to win over Republicans, Independents...and, Democrats...to win in November. So far, he's turning off a huge swath of Democrats; let's see him win without us.
He is doing that already. If the swath of Democrats vituperatively opposed to Obama was as great as you'd like it to be, he'd have fallen already as a candidate -- given Clinton's greater celebrity, connections, and everything else that made her the "inevitable" front-runner, she should have steamrolled Obama, instead of being in the fight of her political life against him.
I still don't count Clinton out -- the race isn't over. She hasn't run her campaign well at all, but she still has some gambits she can attempt. But while I think Obama can win over most of the Clintonites if he wins the nomination, I worry that the steps Clinton may have to take to secure the nomination may do more harm to the Democratic Party than good.
-
Hillary plans to steal the election. For real.
Get a load of this:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8583.html
Apparently Hillary plans to steal Barack's pledged delegates.
Not the SUPERdelegates, who get to choose how to vote at the convention, but his PLEDGED delegates, the ones that he won by winning all those primaries and caucuses.
We live in a banana republic. And Hillary is our dictator.
-
My God
Plagiarism.
-
THIS is the Trouble
When it's all words, and making people get excited with words, then it's always on the hunt for a new batch of words to use.
That video that shows that Governor and Obama on a split screen saying the same thing, it looked like a couple of shysters. Like a pyramid scheme or something.