Letters to the Editor
-
Street fighting liberal
This assumption that if a person has to bend their back for a living he/she is more likely to be a racist is nonsense and an insult to all working americans. Cut it out.
-
Details, Details
Double bind.
Obama stuck to the wonky stuff for two years. All we heard was clamoring for the kind of uplifting speeches like he gave at the 2004 convention. At the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner, he did just that, and suddenly, the lazy frame-seeking MSM developed yet another of its successive bouts of short-term amnesia and tagged him as the "good speech, but policy lightweight" candidate.
Sigh.
Unfortunately, switching back to wonkery now would probably be useless. Once a voter has absorbed the "he's light on details" meme, there is no amount of detail you can inflict on them in a speech that will convince them they're not just hearing airy platitudes.
The only possible way out of that trap is to take it on directly. Something along the lines of "our lazy, frame-seeking media have decided that since I can give a good speech, I must not have any grasp of the boring details of policy. So now, I've got no choice but to bore you with a long policy speech." Wait for laugh, bore the crowd, maybe it changes the perception of some of them.
At which point, the MSM goes back into its "he's going to lose if he doesn't start giving the kind of inspiring speech he did at the convention" frame.
Like I said, double bind.
-
I think Andrew gets it
I'm a white, male, white collar, mid 20s, nearly done with my college degree, and whatever (should be plenty of terms to classify me) primary voter.
I'm voting for Clinton in the primaries precisely because of the specific policy details outlined on her website. Just look at the issues: first two "Strengthening the Middle Class" and "Providing Affordable and Accessible Health Care" . I go under Health care and I see "you can choose from dozens of the same plans available to members of Congress."
Right there, I'm sold.
I go to Obama's website and look up the issues. First two are "Civil Rights" and "Disabilities." Ok, obviously Obama's are in alphabetical order. But, even if I cruise under Healthcare, I see "to buy affordable health coverage that is similar to the plan available to members of Congress. "
What the hell does similar mean? Better, worse, same?
Hillary tells me though, "will provide benefits at least as good as the typical plan offered to Members of Congress, which includes mental health parity and usually dental coverage."
Ah, once again score for Hillary.
I really like Obama and will gladly vote for him come November. He actually might be a better President than either Clinton. I just like the reassurance Clinton gives. And sure, both will only sign what Congress will give them so technically its all up in the air anyways. But I just like that I know the top two parts of Hillary's agenda and what she has planned. I didn't have to even pay attention to the Primaries up to this point if I didn't want to. It was that easy.
I think its great they are running neck and neck, it means that the eventually nominee will just be that much more ready for the General Election.
-
An aside on candidates won't get elected...
... because their a Clinton, because of racism, because he has a Muslim middle name, because she is a she, etc.
I'd hope Salon readers would know this by now, and I bet tons are guilty of doing it: Being a loud mouth, hating the other side, saying your going to move, and such then not even bothering to go vote.
The biggest loud mouths I know who do nothing but spew garbage from the worst of either party are often too lazy to even vote.
-
Keppie
It would be nice if you went beyond the soundbites in your reading ... that always helps ...
-
SocsandTwigs
I enjoy being uninformed. :)
Seriously though, I just did way more research than most will.
-
Obama, Clinton and Karl Rove
Having belonged to several unions, I can tell you members usually don't have much trust in their leaders, especially since no matter how high a portion of minority or female members there are, the union is invariably run by a group of white guys who hang onto the reins like ticks. That said, bloggers on the left are overlooking the most important element of the election - the manipulation of the Democratic primaries by Karl Rove. To date all the G.O.P. money has been poured into Barack's campaign, not McCain's. (For more on this, see the article I've posted at thecityedition.com.) And now that Romney's out, we are about to see hundreds of thousands of Republicans crossover and vote against Hillary by re-registering as Democrats. This is why superdelegates are necessary. With Barack's messy past in Chicago, the G.O.P. knows he'll never survive the mainstream media when they turn their sights on him after the convention.
-
Check your facts ...
Factcheck's article creatively summarizes (or shall we say, shows a lot of imagination in creating a tale of Rove-backed conspiracy) this article form Time:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1680192,00.html
notice how he doesn't provide original citations?
are you on Clinton's newly created payroll?
-
Sorry ...
"What a bigoted comment. A good education doesn’t mean you are smart. It means you were lucky. Your education isn’t showing that you learned anything except how to look down your nose on people.
As one of those Ivy League Educated white collar professionals who actually knows and likes a lot of blue collar liberals, you might be surprised to find that many in this group are more worried about the dismantling of the social safety nets gained through the New Deal and Great Society, than if Clinton is female or Obama is black.
If people want to vote their pocketbooks, it’s OK with me."
I re-read my comment and realize it came off much differently than intended. I didn't mean to say people who did not have the same educational opportunities were "not-so-smart" - I know many of the blue collar working class are much smarter than I am. I just don't think it's so controversial to point out that you tend to find more racism, or more people who believe and spread the ridiculous emails about Obama being a closeted Muslim, among the less educated than you do among the more educated. Yes, it's a sweeping generalization in which it's not difficult to find counterexamples. And aside from racism, many of the working-class Hillary supporters probably think Obama is a highfalutin' fancy-pants liberal who doesn't relate to them or their plight. I just don't believe that, on the whole, the blue collar support Hillary is enjoying is purely and entirely derived from an intense and deep understanding of her and Obama's policy differences, which aren't all that different.