Letters to the Editor
-
What's with super or nonsuperdelegates anyway?
Why do we have to have representatives(delegates) vote for us? Why not direct election in the primaries? Delegates to a convention is as anachronistic as the electoral college.
-
Power to the Superdelegates
Forget power to the people. This 'oversight' system is way too lopsided in favor of the grand political poobah's and it has the potential to ruin the party. They had better get it right by supporting the candidate with the most pledged delegates and then restructure or abandon the superdelegate system before the next election to make it less powerful and more sensitive to the wishes of the electorate. Joan, thanks for the analysis and clarification of this arcane method designed to correct any mistakes of the uninformed masses.
-
Xrandadu Hutman
"when you wrote "fabricator of his public record" you're not far off from the accusations of plagiarism for a single borrowed phrase"
Please. Once again, to compare this to the Swift Boating of Kerry, months and months of paid advertising costing millions of dollars, months of months of people out giving interviews, completely destroys one's credibility on this topic. So far I've seen a single Clinton person quoted a single time using "plagiarism" to describe Obama's shared use of language. This sort of false equivalency is exactly what I'm talking about--you're making my point, not disputing it. But thanks.
"if Hillary Clinton's campaign feels free to take quotes out of context to score political points, what does this tell us about the kind of president she'll be?"
Probably the same kind of President who uses someone's perfectly fine quote about MLK and LBJ to try and paint them as somehow dismissing MLK or african-americans despite several decades of lived experience that shows just the opposite.
"Do you really want a president who uses tactics similar to those used by the Bush Administration? "
And again, anybody who thinks a Hillary Presidency will be the equivalency of a Bush Presidency is all of those things I stated in my original post.
"Actually I haven't heard Obama say he's been Republican-proofed. Quote please?"
He has said on several occasions that he is not worried about what the Republicans might do because he's faced the Clintons. I have no desire to comb electronic databases to find the exact quotes. You want to think I'm lying, fine. If so, that makes my point again.
"Where you go wrong is when you decide to place your focus primarily on the opponent's lack of experience and then just completely fake your evidence for it."
Well, I might have gone wrong had I actually done this. But since my charge of "naivety" is extremely focused, you'd be, umm, "faking" this. As I made no mention of "experience" in a larger context, you'd be, umm, "faking" this. And as my reference was as much to his supporters as to Obama, you'd be, umm, "faking" this. How ironic.
" can't believe all the back-handed psychological, rhetorically slimy tactics being tossed around in here."
Here we go again, proving my point. Somehow my pointing out that there is no equivalency between Rove's tactics/Republican tactics (swift boating, insanity, love child) and Clinton tactics, I've now become "slimy". Hmm, let's see. Obama is over 5 feet tall. Oh no! I've gone "slimy!". Day is lighter than night. I've gone "slimy!". Grow up.
"How's about we all just have honest discussions regarding which candidates we like and why? If you love Hillary Clinton, go ahead and talk her up till your heart's content. Tell us why she reminds you a big fuzzy love bunny of creamy joy. That's cool. I'll listen, with my chin resting gently on my hands, leaning in to hear your testimonial. "That's wonderful!" I'll say, heartened by your blissful appreciation of your One True Presidential Candidate. "
How about you're not so much an idiot then and I'd be happy to tell you why I slightly prefer Hillary (you and your fellow supporters are part of the reason)? And then I'll tell you why I've financially supported Obama. And why I will happily pull the lever for him were he the nominee. And why I actually did pull a lever for him in NY, giving him one of my delegates here. Oh wait--that just wouldn't compute in your tiny little mind would it? Nope, I have to be a slimy, sleazy, machine-like cog who just wants to tear down your virginal-dressed-in-white-blessed-by-all-that-is-pure-and-holy candidate, huh?
-
Hillary/Obama vs. Obama/Hillary ticket -- Why neither will happen.
Why would Obama want a VP who represents the very bridge to the past he's been trying to scuttle? Especially when she brings with her that unguided missile she calls a husband. The Clinton psychodrama has no place in Obama's White House, in the VP spot or otherwise.
And why would the Hildabeast want a VP who will completely outshine her? Her ego simply would not allow someone as admired as Obama in the number two spot. He'd only accentuate her negatives. Not to mention the fact that Obama wouldn't want to be part of a Hillary White House that would already have an unofficial VP in Bill Clinton.
-
Chuck Party Leaders? Bad Idea
Somebody has to keep pointing this out: the reason to have party leaders as self-interested superdelegates is because they're the only people -- besides a (very) few journalists -- who know that it pays to have an electable candidate. Now that "the people" have spoken, however, it's probably too late to do anything about resurrecting any of those maybe-electable white guys like Biden, Edwards or Dodd.
-
Problems @ Steve1us
Having a bad day with women are you? Maybe some wife/girlfriend/mother issues. Perhaps issues with women in authority positions? Watching too much "Hardball" or maybe a big Chris Matthews fan?
Why would you claim that women are voting for Clinton totally based upon gender? Has it possibly occurred to you that just maybe we have the intellect and ability to look at the issues and rheteric and base our choice on that.
-
IT JUST GOES TO SHOW ...
...how absolutely idiotic everyone has gotten this Primary season! To spend paragraphs analyzing how the Times did an article on Superdelegates is just plain...well, I say get a life, honey.
The superdelegates will vote one way and one way only: Whatever is in their most political self-interested way to vote.
For those who want to make more of it than is necessary, let me repeat: The superdelegates will vote for whomever is in their best political self-interest.
Now, how many paragraphs did THAT take?