Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
Obama takes North Carolina and only barely loses Indiana, narrowing Hillary's hopes to the 366 phantom delegates from Michigan and Florida.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • some kind words for america

    who would have thought, just six months ago, that a black man with the exotic xenophobic name of barak hussein obama would get the nomination? really. half of america is female. but a black male with a moslem name? a scary fantasy. but somehow the vast majority of america would not only overlook this but be entranced by his nobility, intelligence and frankness. when he gets into office and doesn't need to flatter dull-normals, you'll see even more of this "professorial" air - which is not elitist, but refreshing.
    these kudos are most spectacular for the young, but think, even of the worst demographic, old white uneducated honkie ladies, fully ONE THIRD voted for obama. that's saying a lot. pat yourselves on the back, america!

  • puller58

    He did promise last night to seat the delegates from Florida and Michigan, if that helps.

    I know both sides probably blame one another for this, and I don't mean to stick my toe in, but it's difficult for me to think that both candidates don't want 50 states represented, but represented fairly.

    cheers.

  • @Devichan

    We know you exist and we love you ;o) I was just trying to make a point about how irrational it is to try to denigrate the black vote. My wife, my 3 sisters, and my mother also voted for Obama. That covers 3 states that all went Obama's way. I still think Hillary's strength comes from the party establishment....her big wins all came from the deepest blue states where the Democratic establishment machine is well oiled.....it just so happens that women represented ~60% of democrats in those states, and that white women were the largest most reliable demographic for Clinton.

  • Re: Holding out for VP

    "Suspicions have been raised that Hillary is holding out for a VP position with Barack. I am curious what Salon and its readers have to say about that."

    Are you kidding? Are you trying to start a bar-room brawl? She would have to be actually contrite for that spot, and I don't know that she's got it in her after all that race baiting.

    I would like to draw reader's attention to the PHOTO. How many people think she looks like your mom telling you to clean your room?

    "I'm very disappointed in you, Indiana. I thought you could do better than this."

    But then, to be fair, is that the shot that the photographer and his editor vetted? Or was that just the face she was making all night? Hard to say.

  • mr. sugarman

    I agree. I'd no idea he'd get this far. Part of me fears for his life if he gains a significant lead in the polls come October. Living through '68 gave me that knot in the stomach, but I still believe this country can turn toward its destiny as the last best hope of earth.

  • Billcap it's you and me with our boxing gloves on for another round...what say?

    "You can't with a straight face argue that Obama getting 90 percent of the black vote is simply measuring the popularity of his positions or his campaign or whatever non-race item you want to pull up."

    ....I had this discussion with you, and to be fair with many many people and here is the bottom line, my friend:

    making assumptions about black voters...why they voted the way they did...is not kosher.

    I don't want to use the "racism" word, but how would you like it if someone made assumptions about your vote based on your skin color?

    Unless you have spoken with every black person in America, conducted a study, referred to a study, have in short evidence, every assumption you make is an assumption.

    It is not a fact.

    Black voters count. They didn't count in Florida eight years ago, and look at the mess we're in. Bill Clinton had a 90% approval rating amongst black voters during his impeachment and the approval of only 50% of white people in the same period. Were you making assumptions about black voters when this was going on? White voters?

    Please, please, stop making assumptions. I don't think you're doing it intentionally, but you are hurting the Democratic party when you do it, and Americans of every color, stripe and gender are hurt by it. Back your assumptions up with evidence of inention and not merely your intuitive conclusion, or stop ayour assertions that black people are less sophisticated or intelligent when they cast their vote then you are when you cast yours.

    peace and goodwill.

  • @Jeffersonian

    Jeffersonian wrote: "Part of me fears for his life if he gains a significant lead in the polls come October. Living through '68 gave me that knot in the stomach, but I still believe this country can turn toward its destiny as the last best hope of earth."

    I would hate to say that we turned down this chance out of fear of what the bigots might do. That's no way to live and it's no way to run a country.

  • billcap another thought

    isn't it reverse racism that so many Clinton supporters are using when they seem to argue that the Democratic "base" white working class rural supporters, who voted for Clinton will vote only for McCain in the fall, even though their policies (McCain's and Clintons) are extremely different?

    Isn't this an assumption of racism on the part of white working class Democrats--not to vote with their party because only of the personality or possibly the race of the other candidate?

    Also, when taking for granted the fact that black voters will support Clinton should she win, also keep in mind that many have been offended by her remarks, whether you agree or disagree that they should be offended, this bridge does remain in a state of disrepair.

    I'm not sure that Obama's bridge to white working class voters, aside from his ill-timed "bitter" remarks which have been overplayed, are damaged in the same way. Argue otherwise if you disagree.

  • @sugarman

    some kind words for america

    but somehow the vast majority of america would not only overlook this but be entranced by his nobility, intelligence and frankness.

    pat yourselves on the back, america!

    Umm . . . you do know that "america" consists of more than AA's and bat-shit crazy liberals, don't you?

    That the DEM PARTY has let a slight majority of them pick the nominee doesn't speak for "america".

    I've voted a straight Dem ticket for the last sixteen years. I've given thousands of dollars to Dem candidates. But I didn't vote for Dukakis, and I won't vote for Obama (even with a Clinton-supporter as his VP).

    I'd rather have a President McCain; I'll support him in his moderate policies, and oppose him on his conservative ones.

    That's still better than a disaster of a President Obama administration. (I do remember the Carter years).

    Country above party.

    IMHO.