Letters to the Editor
-
Don't forget about the West
All this talk about eggheads and African Americans versus "hard-working" whites seems to be very East Coast-centric, if you ask me.
The old coalitions are, well, old. Has it escaped Joan Walsh's notice that Obama is pretty popular in the Rocky Mountain West and the Pacific Northwest? Democrats, in general, are on the ascent in some western states that once were considered hopelessly red. And Obama is fitting in with that change.
-
A well-thought out and reasoned article by Joan Walsh
Sure there were some things I disagreed with. But by and large I found it reasoned and well-thought out for once. Obama does need to gain traction with these groups.
Certainly no one is writing off the working class white male vote. It is crucial in this election and one Obama needs to win.
Still I think it is fair to point out that Bill Clinton only got 40% of this vote during both of his winning runs, and Al Gore got 36% and techncially won. So if Obama can get 38% of this, he's pretty much set.
Also Obama IS going to need to make inroads with women. I don't think putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket is worth this. I do think treating her like a queen, giving her a keynote address during the Democratic National Convention, giving in to all the rest of her requests and demands, letting her have a voice in selecting the V.P. (probably making it one of her supporters), listening to her legislative agenda, agreeing to make her Senate Majority Leader and just maybe compromising and going with her healthcare plan ARE worth it to ensure you can regain most of her base and she campaigns her heart out for you.
-
IaintBacchus
well put. I have a CD somewhere by Joe Hill...I love that man.
And I agree that coroporations have become saturated in both parties and the media...
Too bad the media just talks about candidate "rhetoric" becoming more populist...it would be nice for populist policy as well.
And Carol Richards you make a valid point. Some discussions of race in these elections are more helpful/enlightening than others. Insulting all working class people by telling them who they will or will not vote for in a general election based on racial prejudice, for example, probably won't qualify as helpful.
Just an example.
-
A few thoughts
Aside from the fact that I've lost almost all respect for Joan, as apparently a great deal, if not a majority of LW responding to her incredibly Clinton slanted columns reflect, let's look at what passes for "analysis" fronm Joan. (And I am truly sad to see her lead Salon into a very depressing downward spiral that in many striking ways mirrors the downward spiral the Clinton campaign itself underwent.)
First, this defense of Hillary. Yes in immediate context I am willing to give Clinton a break, except that it is so tone deaf as to be inexcusable. It is another in a long line of strategies of the Clintons in this campaign to demean the African American Community and other constituancies.
First, Hillary Clinton is no more a great champion of the white blue collar Middle Class than any other Democrat. Obama's "bitter" comments reflected conventional Democratic wisdom regearding "Reagan Democrats" since well, forever, from Bill Clinton in 1991 sharing how the Republicans "scare the shit out of a bunch of insecure white guys", to Hillary's epmphatic "Screw Em" in 1995 when this group didn't respond to the Clinton policy proposals, to Jim Webb who openly talked about gays, guns, and God (abortion)-as did Howard Dean- as Republican wedge issues. So Hillary in attempting to use it against Obama as "elitist" was an enormous hypocrite.
Second, Joan, why is it OK for Clinton and her surrogates to CONSTANTLY refer to Obama supporters as "Latte drinkers, eggheads, etc", and lie about the party's activist base, reiterating Karl Rove's falsehoods about Moveon? So we get in a lather about those poor working class whites but its fine to smear everyone else in the party who doesn't agree with you? Why is my vote less important than anyone elses? Clinton's attitude was deeply offensive, except it has been ongoing. Fine with Joan. Haven't seen it addresed here once.
Third, if I read it right, Brazile said "we don't have to **just rely** on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics. We need to look at the Democratic Party, expand the party, expand the base and not throw out the baby with the bath water." Oh, Joan caught that, but it "sounded" as if Brazile, who by the way is NOT an Obama declared supporter, was speaking for the Obama campaign, who I'm certain is not interested in writing off anyone. As a matter of fact, from what I'm hearing, Clinton may try to prevent Obama from designating Bill Richrdson as VP out of anger and retribution. Who then would be acting alone in destructive, narcissitic self interest and hurting the party in attracting the very people Joan decries as being "left out"?
Finally, this constant attempt to analyze this election based on past election cycles (a la Kerry for example) is not only foolish but stupid and displays a complete disregard of the reality that will emerge. Clinton supporters, no matter their anger at the moment, are not going to defect to a gung ho pro life, pro war, pro Bush economic policy McCain, and neither are most middle Americans because the wounds of the Bush years have gone too deep. McCain is a deeply flawed cadidate, both personally and policy wise. Obama will hold onto and expand the Democratic base while simultaneously attracting independents and Republicans who felt betrayed by Bush and his surrogate McCain.
Of course they have to run smart. But most likely they will. Its a deep Democratic year. Joe Scarborough of all people has consistently said expect the Dems to win the White House and pick up 50 seats in the House and control the Senate.
What I find really sad about Salon is how far back to the pack it has come. Is this because of Walsh's (sic) leadership or that a bunch of Clintonites, like Blumenthal, run the place? The activist blogs that Joan seems to have little respect for,(and Chuck Todd of MSNBC) called this race months ago. Pennsylvania, because it lined up for Clinton in every way possible, including the 6 week wait, was a false positive. Now the MSM is catching up to the smarts of people like Kos who has been almost comlpetely on the money from the start.
That's why I can't hardly read anything from here anymore. Its like Newsweek. Four months from now, at this pace, Salon will catch up with reality. So what is it offering? What does Joan really offer? Sadly, very little.
P.S. What the hell do Republicans bring to the table about race? Are you kdding me?