Letters to the Editor
-
Don't kid yourself
Don't kid yourself. It's now ten-fifteen PM and the cable outlets have all called the election for Clinton. A win is a win is a win. Will it end up being four or five percent? Six-seven-or-eight percent? It won't matter even it's only by one percent. A win is a win is a win. And once again Obama proves that he has neither the ability nor the intestinal fortitude to knock Clinto out of the race. The sun is going down on Obama. Very few people really like HIllary Clinton, even among those who support her. But here unliabiality quotient is not the issue. Obama's failure to do what it takes to win (which in this case would have been to have knocked Clinton out of the race by now)grows in its signficance each day. Look for A Clinton victory in Indiana and a closer-than-expected margin of victory for Obama in North Carolina. Then look for the Clinton people to muddy up the waters big time on Florida and Michigan. ((Has anyone been listening to Terry McAuliff?)) The super-delegates will begin trickling to Clinton. Indeed watch as some super-delegates who had already committed for Obama reverse themselves.
I don't like Hillary Clinton. But I admire one feature about her: She does what it takes to win. Having balls does not alone make one qualified to be Presiendent, but NOT having balls is a definite DISQALIFICATION for being President. Of the the two Deomcratic candidates only HIllary is equipped with balls. John W. McGinley
-
drop out
As a lifelong Democrat and long time PA resident, I have been following the primary with great interest, including listening carefully to both candidates stake out their claims for becoming the nominee. It's now abundantly clear that indeed one of the candidates should step down, for the good of the party and country--and it's Obama.
Increasingly it's becoming painfully obvious that Obama's campaign is based on his ability to mesmerize crowds with lofty rhetoric and high-flying pledges to produce "change" ( unspecified what or how), followed by "hope", and then back to more "change". His glaring lack of policy development, combined with his weak record, make it hard for me to understand how at present he could be considered a serious candidate for arguable the world's most powerful position.
And whether Hillary is as charismatic is to me irrelevant-- she's very clearly smart, experienced, very policy-focused, and eminently qualified and ready to lead. And as a male, I do believe we are overdue for a woman President.
After her strong victory here in PA, it's evident that the best thing Obama could do at this point is gracefully withdraw. This would be well-received by both party and country, and seen as the right move now, allowing the Democrats to unite behind a much more presidential Presidential candidate. He would then have 4-8 years to garner some much-needed experience, hopefully build a credible resume, and work to dissociate himself from some of the unsavory characters like Jeremiah Wright with whom he has been closely associated.
Kind of a no-brainer at this point, isn't it?
-
@ susan scharfman: Very thoughtful comments
I perused this letters thread hoping to find some substance, something thought-provoking, some new way of looking at this campaign. When I read your comments I saw something that I really hadn't thought about before: that the people of Pennsylvania are of the soil - the blood of soldiers who lost their lives in the Civil War. I heard, or read, somewhere that Pennsylvania is one - if not the only state that has a huge percentage of people who have lived there their entire life. I wonder if this is part of the reason.
Just thanks for the thoughts.
-
The Pennsylvania epic
We now know Hillary Clinton won the Primary in PA. I am a conservative who has never cared for either of the Clintons, but I am proud for her and I am proud of her.
The media has reached new levels of disgusting behavior in its biased coverage for McCain and Obama, and for trashing other candidates--and especially media mistreatmen of Hillary Clinton. When the "non politician's" fat campaign coffers are added to the mix, and pressure on superdelegates to declare for Obama and push Clinton out of the race, it is difficult to see how the Clinton Campaign stood up under these massive assaults.
Not only stood up, but prevailed in PA tonight.
-
@ HP: Most "reliable" block of voters?
You may feel and think this way. There are a lot of people who would say that women are the most "reliable" block of voters and have been for years. They are also approximately 60% of the Democratic Party. And women come in all races/colors/ethnicities...
-
no jjppmd
I understand and respect your decision to support Hillary. I am not a Hillary supporter but would vote for her in the general if she was the nominee.
But I must correct you. I am not mesmerized by Obama and that is NOT why I support his campaign. I've taken the time to read through his policies ( I don't rely on TV sound bites for policy evaulations as I am sure you don't either). I also read through Hillary's.
Not much difference.
So what you haven't grasped is the WHY of Obama support, rather assuming we are all mesmerized. An astounding insult.
For me its fundamental difference and something Clinton will need to understand and not just write off if she's ever going to garner the support of his base. Without exception this is to some degree how most of us feel.
Here it is:
See, I really think Washington is corrupt. I think that politicians get elected and go up there and do whatever they want or rather, what goes to the highest bidder. I think the longer you're there the more difficult it is to remain unaffected by the corruption. I think they have good intentions but the power is very powerful. I think that people do a lot of back scratching and tit for tat and that's why nothing ever gets done. Its the ultimate in Office Politics except we're the pawns and all end up paying the price.
So for me Obama's short stint on the Hill is a PLUS. For me his ability to get people involved in government is the crucial missing link in our system being fully functional. See, the politicians wouldn't do what they do if they knew voters were watching - paying attention. To me, his awaking Americans to become involved in their government is the critical element we need in making any of the good ideas actually come to fruition.
For me Clinton represents that corruption . that back room deal. That tit for tat and special interest lure. I like her but I;m not sure how objective she can be. Washington is not a nice place. She's been around it for a long long time.
See? I also think the presidency is about leadership. Its like being a CEO. No CEO is running a company alone. Its the CEOs job to make sure he understands what's happening in each department and how it might effect whats happening in other departments and make decisions accordingly. A good CEO has excellent department heads but more than that, he knows how to lead the company. Inspire the workers, the management, the shareholders 0 from top to bottom. He or she must be futuristically minded about his/her own industry and industries that could effect the company today and tomorrow. I think Hillary is a great lady but I also think Obama has what it takes to be a great leader. He is calm and steady, thoughtful and deliberate. Not perfect but I don't expect that of anyone, including Hillary.
THATS why I support Obama. I'm not mesmerized. I actually have a brain in my head. You may disagree with me and that's ok. But don't ever forget this letter. Many Obama supporters feel this in some way shape or form.