- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
“Again you seem to be talking down to the poor, uneducated, naive Obama supporters. It's funny how people mock the education and affluence of Obama supporters ("latte drinkers") and then act as if they are all a bunch of ignorant neophytes.”
You’ll have to show me where I mocked anyone’s education and affluence. (Though it’s also getting a little wearisome to constantly hear some Obama supporters comment on how well educated and affluent they are) As I said before, you can read condescension into it if you wish, but none was intended. It’s better if you just read the criticism as written, and not take it personally. That it’s better for the Obama campaign was my original point.
‘Neophytes’, on the other hand. I didn’t use that word, but maybe it fits. I was criticizing behaviors (all the oversensitivity, taking everything personally, self-victimization, moral outrage and so forth) because not only are they annoying, they’re a long way off from what we should be hearing and discussing. But now that you mention it, those behaviors are not really indicative of any great political sophistication. Maybe the shoe fits? Either way, it’s the behavior that’s the problem, not the level of sophistication of any particular voters (though that’s another problem, way beyond Obama).
Separately, wouldn’t it be logical if (given Obama’s early explicit strategy of targeting ‘millenials’ and given the dramatic increase in voter turnout among this demographic, in which so many first-time eligible voters reside) many Obama supporters were, in fact, neophytes? Would that be a bad thing? Neophytes’ votes count just as much as decades-long political junkies, last time I checked. Point being, maybe that's one less thing to feel insulted about, even if it's true.
Finally, here’s what I meant in the last paragraph of my original post. In every election there are tons of people who vote for their candidate for reasons that are, to be charitable, gauzy. I might wish it were different, so might you; the issue is what happens to those people after reality bites. I still think it’s an open question how many people who are now wrapping themselves in a rather vague idea of what Obama will do in office (and none of us has a very concrete idea), fueled by that hope, will still be around when the honeymoon is over. It worries me; as I was saying, I hope those people will stick around. They’ve been known to bail in the past. The country can’t afford to have them bail now.
If raising that question is talking down to the poor victimized Obama supporters out there, then fine, I’ll wear that, and we can talk again sometime around Summer 2009, if we aren’t all saluting President McCain. If I’m wrong, I’ll offer my apology with no small amount of glee.
