Letters to the Editor
-
@azdirk
No.
Most people supported Kerry because he wasn't Bush. This is not a good enough reason anymore.
-
@ MaddieP "Open letter to Howard Dean"
I have the utmost contempt for: Nancy Pelosi -- impeachment off the table. Harry Reid -- FISA yo-yo and coward. Howard Dean -- muddles, makes, and breaks primary rules on a whim. The Democratic Party and the Nation will be better off when these clowns are replaced.
It is more than reprehensible that Dean has been trying to steer this primary election. He claims we must hurry with this decision. Does that mean the DNC schedule was faulty? Does that mean more states should have held earlier primaries? It is obvious that Dean is in Obama's pocket. He gives the ball a big nudge in a preferred direction, then ostensibly backs off with the pretense of fairness dripping down his chin.
But, Obamaniacs can probably count on Howard 'Reach Around' Dean to have some more crap up his sleeve, and they can get this primary rigged once and for all.
-
MaddieP on history
Your pat answers are scary because they make lots of risky presuppositions we just simply cannot predict because we have no historical context through which to filter them.
One of the things that's striking about this election is how many appeals to history we've seen in the discussion of who's a better candidate.
Yes, the past is important and I'm almost always glad to see my almost pathologically ahistorical conationals actually reflecting on events that are no longer part of the current news and entertainment cycle.
But when the history of the 2008 election is written, it will be one of those foundation-shaking, epochal turning points that heralded the beginning of a new direction in American politics, like the Kennedy campaign or the Watergate hearings — not as the culmination or validation of old ideas.
Maybe it's hard to see that because some people set such high standards for the candidates. We want big money to disappear from politics and when it doesn't overnight we decide that such and such a candidate is a disappointment. We want our leaders to have perfect records on legislation.
And so on. It's foolish — no politician is ever uncompromisingly ideal, by definition. Contemporary anxieties tend to seem silly in retrospect.
And in that context, none of the current handwringing and gnashing of teeth over the lack of certainty in the campaign — a convention which will actually serve its intended purpose, oh horrors! — will be at all relevant. In fact it will be embarrassing.
-
no she can't
I was surprised to hear that 4 out of 5 clinton supporters thought she actually had a chance of winning the nomination. She really doesn't get the smart people, does she? Probably the same folks who bought into the bush b.s. for so long. This whole thing is good for the media so they're playing it up. That's all that's going on here.
-
Women's vote
Isn't it ratehr Ironic that Hillary is getting her "gender" votes from women who are not progressives?
-
h0tr0d
What's your beef with working white women? Are you most bothered by the "working," "white," or just women in general? I guess I'm just puzzled why you would so easily dismiss any portion of the Democratic party, since we're going to need every vote to defeat McCain. You can't afford to alienate anyone (MUAHAHAHA!).
Clinton has plenty of fans in other demographics, and Obama also has many white working women's votes. The sweeping generalizations are getting old.
-
@postnoodz
What makes you think I have a beef with working class white women ? Is that like asking if I have stopped beating my wife ? Did you look at the exit polls in PA, OH, or NH ? What is the largest group that consistently supports Hillary ?
-
h0tr0d, again
What is the largest group that consistently supports Hillary ?
And? That makes as much sense as saying, "look at how many of the menz didn't vote for her!" You're the one who can't give working women (sorry, "working white women") the benefit of the doubt that we won't be able to tell the difference between Obama and McCain in November.
Obama WILL win the nomination and WILL get the support of working class men.
Why do you make a point of highlighting "working class men?"
If Obama had let's say, a 75-35% majority in support over Clinton, I'd be more understanding of some of these letters. It's just mighty presumptuous to assume that a few percentage point lead renders all Clinton supporters' opinions completely irrelevant. You do realize almost just as many people have voted for her, yes?
As far as the wife beating humor, to each his own I suppose. It's not my cup of tea, personally.
-
Why Clinton and Obama won't be on the same ticket
1) Relationship. They don't like each other very much. This is not a very important reason, but it's a reason.
2) Bill. Bill Clinton used to be president. If Obama were Clinton's vice-president, he'd be -- at best -- the third most important member of the administration. More likely, there would be cabinet members who would be more important. If Clinton were Obama's vice-president, Bill Clinton's fame would significantly undermine the president.
3) Experience. While Clinton's time in the White House gives her a credible claim to more experience than Obama, neither Clinton nor Obama has a great deal of experience. Both candidates will want a vice-president in the Cheney / Gore / Bush Sr. mold -- an elder statesman/woman with significant experience. Foreign policy experience would be a particular plus.
4) Geography. Clinton has strong ties to Arkansas and to Illinois, but she's a New Yorker. Obama has strong ties to Hawaii and -- to a lesser extent -- to Kansas, but he's from Illinois. While Geography isn't a deal breaker, both candidates would prefer a vice-president from a red or purple state. New Mexico, Kansas, Virginia, Arkansas, Arizona, or Indiana are probably in the running. (New Mexico and Virginia twice!)
5) Risk. Clinton has a reputation for being risk averse. If she were to be the nominee, it's likely she would want to put a white man on the ticket.
6) Negatives. One of the arguements against Clinton as the nominee is the arguement that she energizes the Republican base. Assuming Obama believes this, he is likely to be reluctant to choose Clinton as his running mate.