Letters to the Editor
-
senorplaid
"As to the 90 percent, unfortunately, the differences seem to be on pretty big issues, most largely the Iraq war and the follow-up on Kyl-Lieberman"
Well, first of all, I'd say if you agree with one candidate on 90 percent of the issues and disagree with a candidate on 90 percent, no matter how big the issue is it seems to be logical you'd vote for the former. Maybe that's just me. I'm not big on single-issue votes. But that doesn't negate the silliness of asking for a list of reasons why someone who supports Obama would also support Hillary over McCain. Unless you're voting for Obama based not on his policies but on his personality (and Obama supporters get riled when accused of that, as they should), then you already know what those policies are. You just yourself said you agree that they are in sync on 90 percent of the policies--do you really need for me to run down the specific list? Really? Answer that to yourself honestly and you'll see why I bridled at the question (and I'll admit, I'm crankier in the morning and even crankier when I wake up to someone calling me a racist or saying I make racist arguments--so I'm happy to apologize for the instant sarcasm. I should know you better before I get sarcastic with you)
As for the war--since it's in the context of Hillary or McCain, if you honestly think there is no difference between Hillary and McCain on the war going forward, then you must not think there is any between Obama and McCain since again, they have the same policy. McCain clearly thinks there is a difference between him and Hillary--think I'll trust him on that. So on your "big" issue, it's just another reason to support Hillary. I didn't like her original vote on the war either--it's one the reasons my preference for her over Obama is slight. But I know if I don't like the war (or the idea of another) McCain is not a better choice than Hillary.
I don't need someone to give me a list of reasons to vote for Obama a year after he started running--I know there isn't much daylight between him and Hillary on the issues I consider priorities. And I know what he's like in terms of intelligence, etc. Which is why I think the question is a silly one (in either directiont) It's why I cut him a check the moment he announced and have cut him others since then, why I voted a delegate to him here in NY and why I'll happily pull a lever for him if he's the nominee.
And I agree his coattails will be bigger, which I've already said in this thread. And I've said in this thread it's something the superdelegates should consider when they think over their vote. But there I go being irrelevant again and going against the rules, saying that Obama has to make an argument to the superdelegates instead of just being crowned for not getting the number the rules say he had to get.
-
@ KateTex
As soon as Oprah entered stage left, the race became about race. This was well before the famous 'racist' remarks in SC, which were in actuality, remarks twisted like pretzels until they accommodated a racist mold.
What an absolutely bizarre argument. If anyone in this country transcends race, it's Oprah.
-
@ JackSparks
Sorry, but this discussion reminds me of the history of denying blacks the right to vote. It was never about directly denying the vote. It was poll taxes. It was grandfather clauses. It was a thousand technicalities.
Black voters, young voters, pick your category, don't owe the Clintons a damned thing, and certainly not the nomination.
I think you're absolutely right. The reason it will sting all the more for blacks is the fact that, for so long, rightly or wrongly, we've seen the Clinton's as people who were "on our side." Now we find out he was playing us just like that famous saxophone.
-
Kinda agree with Billcap
If neither candidate makes it to 2025, the superdelegates will make the call. How they should make the call, and what are the consequences seem to be the interesting bits. Right now I hear a lot of uncommitted super delegates are in no hurry to take a stand, being the brave souls that they are. And they're right to let the voters take this as far as possible. I think a lot of Obama supporters are assuming that the current trends hold and Obama retains the lead in delegates and popular vote. In reality we won't know until June, or until something drastic occurs. If the candidates split the popular vote vs the delegates, then I think things will get dicey.
If Obama wins both the delegate count and the popular vote, and doesn't have a major implosion, I think there will be blow back if the supers vote in Hillary. Likewise if Hillary was in the reverse position. As far as which candiate will take the most votes away from McCain, and lose the least, I think this is a judgement call right now. Current Polls don't take into account all the unexpected events that will happen between now and the election.
Unless you're voting for Obama based not on his policies but on his personality
But I do think Obama has superior communication and marketing skills, and yes, charisma. Attributes that I consider essential components of leadership and statecraft. Is that his personality? And I think I prefer his temperament, certainly compared to MacCain, who periodically shoots off like a bottle rocket.
-
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill...
I said that "Barack Obama is winning the delegate count and the popular vote, and unless something changes drastically in the dozen or so remaining contests, that's likely to remain true until the last votes are cast."
How can you possibly disagree with that? This is a narrowly framed, factually accurate statement. Counting pledged delegates and superdelegates who have stated a preference, Obama leads Hillary by over 100 delegates, by virtually everyone's count. He's also up by 600,000 in the popular vote without Florida and 300,000 if you break the DNC's own rules and count the Florida votes. The remaining contests are too few and too small to affect these numbers in any significant fashion, in all probability. So, unless something changes drastically, Obama is likely to come out of the last contest with his delegate and popular vote leads intact.
I never said that Obama had this thing locked up, or that it would be impossible for Hillary to wind up the nominee. But I think any reasonable person would have to agree that something would have to change quite drastically between now and the convention for that not to be the case. And by "something drastic," I mean something along the lines of having about 2/3 of the remaining unpledged delegates support Hillary, which would be a dramatic shift from how the superdelegates have been lining up.
You're welcome to make any arguments that you want to make about why you think Hillary should be the nominee, despite Obama's performance in the contests thus far. And yes, you're absolutely right that she could yet become the nominee. But that's irrelevant to my point, which is that Obama is winning and will probably go into the convention with more pledged delegates and popular votes.
Finally, I'm sorry that I incorrectly ascribed your vitriol as being the result of passion for one of the candidates. It's becoming increasingly obvious that you just like to argue with people on the internet. So you have fun with that.