Letters to the Editor
-
How Soon We Forget
The Clintons are loved by some of us and hated by many. Why they are loved has always escaped me. During the 8 years of Clinton leadership the Republican agenda was what got passed and at the end the Democratic Party was in a shambles. We lost both the House and the Senate during their tenure.
Since that time the Democratic Party has re-organized itself under the leadership of Howard Dean (opposed by the Clintons)and others with a focus on broad-based grass roots development.
Look around you at the political activity this year, they obviously succeeded.
Now we have the chance to select someone who is brilliant, inspirational, broadly experienced, and a unifier not a divider. Barack is someone who is attractive to independents and liberal Republicans (even some not so liberal)as well as Democrats. He can not only get elected but bring many others into government with him. That is the kind of politician he is.
It is sad to see someone who is obviously intelligent and accomplish thinking that someone has a right to her vote. We owe no one our vote but the People of the United States of America. Use it wisely and vote your conscience.
C. Emery
-
But who will actually win the election?
I can't see how Hillary Clinton can get the electoral votes to win. Where she will lose, and lose badly for Democrats, is in the West.
Only Hawaii and California can be counted on for Clinton. I live in Seattle, and I see an uphill battle for Clinton to carry Washington or Oregon. And she'll be behind in Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Montana, while Obama could carry most of these states.
Further, there are some currently Republican Senate seats in the West that can become Democratic, but Hillary Clinton will make that harder, Specifically, unseating Republican Gordon Smith in Oregon, and electing Mark Udall in Colorado and Tom Udall in New Mexico will really help Democrats get a more comfortable majority in Congress.
If the candidates *feel* even to you, as they often do to me, take a look at the best strategy. For me the best strategy is voting for Obama, hands down.
-
The tears again
This is getting disgusting
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/04/clinton-holds-emotional-meeting-at-yale/
let's all get doctor phil in on this and have a good old drumming tearful retreat ... ug, blech, phooey!!!
-
I get it
I don't know why I'm going to vote for either. Maybe I lost some political faith after W was "elected" twice. Maybe I'm so sick and tired of Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush - that the very thought of adding another Clinton to the list of Presidential hopefuls makes me queasy (even if she is more politically experienced). Maybe I'll vote Republican for the first time ever because they made this mess (War, economy, deficit) they should get us out of it.
-
So even you debase this race to sex/race issues?
I am rather shocked that you, who I read often and respect as a journalist, would actually debase the historical significance of what we are about to do to a theme of race and sex. How about issues? How about these candidates' history? Hillory voted twice for war and excused her vote by saying she hadn't read the bills. How is that experience? How do you forgive that? how do you tell the mothers of the almost 4000 US soldiers dead in Iraq that you are the one ready on Day One? Is a vagina the only qualifying factor you see? This article disgusted me. And speaking as a former Edwards supporter, I am astounded that you, as a former Edwards supporter, would even have a question about who to back now. As amazed as I was back in'68 when all those RFK backers went for Humphrey over McCarthy. How could you get so stupid?
-
Leave the identity politics at the door
Voting for someone simply because they are a woman, or simply because they're black is a terrible way to make a decision. How offended would you be if someone told you they were voting for Obama because he was a guy? The message you send if you make a decision based on gender is that that's an okay way to make a decision.
I can certainly understand being undecided in this vote...the two leading candidates have little policy difference between them, but they have vast differences in style and personality. So that's where you ought to look to make a decision.
Myself...I don't get a vote, not being American, but Obama has certainly caught my attention and imagination.
-
That Iraq vote
Hillary's Iraq vote was a disappointment, yes, but she has convinced me that she will end this dismal war. I also find Obama's contention that he has steadfastly been against the war to be flawed. If he were so adamant about it, why on earth would he endorse Lieberman over Lamont? That support doesn't make sense unless one realizes that Obama is just as much a game player as the next politician. As for Hillary's vote on Iraq, she was under the gun with immense pressure from her constituents, the media, and national sentiment. Remember, at that time, we did not know what we now know. Added to that, it was a great deal easier to speak against the war in Chicago than in the U.S. Senate. Would she even have survived politically? I think that is a valid question.
I do not think the voters are going to overlook Obama's race nor do I think America is color blind. There is a great deal of prejudice out there and I fear a McCain victory if Obama heads the ticket.
-
And another thing...
I was a real FOB back in the day. I believe HIllory was absolutely correct when she spoke of the wide right wing conspiracy. But lately, their rhetoric and Bill's race baiting has lowered my opinion of them. They have pulled off the masks and revealed the lizards underneath. They are for winning at all costs. Winning for winning's sake. Blind ambition is an ugly thing and they have become very ugly. Obama wants the presidency to try to change the nature of the political debate and correct the injustices of the past 8 years. Hillory wants to win the White House. End of story.