home

Feingold: Obama Fans Should "Cool It"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:04:48 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

I think I have been clear that I believe Barack Obama will be the Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. If he is, I hope all Democrats will support him. But I have no doubt now that the biggest obstacle to Obama's being able to unify the Democratic Party is likely to be the behavior of Obama blogs, Obama radio talk show hosts, the Obama network (NBC), Obama supporters and the Obama campaign itself. The contempt shown for Hillary Clinton supporters has been appalling. Russ Feingold has some advice for these folks:

"I'll tell some of the (Barack) Obama supporters here today: Cool it," Feingold, D-Middleton, said Wednesday to a group of about 50 people at the University of Wisconsin Marathon County. "Take it a little easy."

Feingold, like me, is a tepid Obama supporter. His advice is sound. Will Obama fans take it to heart? I doubt it frankly.

Update (TL): Comments now closed.

< Contempt For Clinton Supporters and Clinton Voters | Late Night: You Ain't Going Nowhere >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Feingold: Obama Fans Should "Cool It" | 265 comments (265 topical)
    Feingold says RELAX. (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Joelarama on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:07:35 PM EST
    80s redux.  Couldn't resist a little snark.  Sorry.

    Feingold...Feingold...Feingold.... (none / 0) (#200)
    by ACitizen on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:56:55 PM EST

    ............ah, I am not concerned with him he's just some 'gadfly'.....

    [ Parent ]
    Where was he (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:19:12 PM EST
    about 2 months ago?  That's when such advice would have had some weight.

    Now, the proverbial ship has sailed.

    Fans? (5.00 / 1) (#219)
    by tek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:23:27 PM EST
    How about telling the Party leaders to cool it?  I don't know what makes these career politicians think they have the right to choose our presidential candidate.  I'm so sick of the Democratic Party right now I don't know if I can ever support it again.

    [ Parent ]
    Aww. good for my Senator Russ (none / 0) (#38)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:08:12 PM EST
    -- despite Ashcroft and Roberts, I guess I'll donate to him again.  Ever a voice of sanity amid the fools, that's my Senator Feingold.

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry to jump in here,but on this topic, there's (none / 0) (#55)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:25:06 PM EST
    a poll over at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23847781/ wanting to know if Hillary should drop out and it's over 50% yes and 37% no.  

    I thought you all would want to take a gander at this poll and perhaps make your feelings known.

    [ Parent ]

    It's msnbc.... (5.00 / 4) (#71)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:36:10 PM EST
    ..I'm surprised Hillary even has 37%

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah, but, couldn't we make it 40%? (none / 0) (#78)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:39:07 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Clintonites don't do MSNBC (none / 0) (#102)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:54:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, evidently some do, because she has 37%. (none / 0) (#135)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:09:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Traitors (none / 0) (#160)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:26:10 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    of course (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by tek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:24:38 PM EST
    she's trailing, most Clinton fans know not to go to MSNBC.

    [ Parent ]
    Well, I know that. i was suggesting that we (5.00 / 1) (#230)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:31:49 PM EST
    make an exception and go vote for her! You don't have to stay and read anything.

    BTW -interesting that Ralph Nadar is telling Hillary to stay in the race.

    http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/03/28/dont-listen-to-senator-leahy/


    [ Parent ]

    It's Democracy (none / 0) (#244)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:50:09 PM EST
    Get used to it.....

    [ Parent ]
    2 months ago? Preoccupied (none / 0) (#139)
    by Ben Masel on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:12:05 PM EST
    with his job as a Senator, fighting the wiretap battle.

    I'm disappointed w both Obama and Clinton for playing hookie.


    Keep your eyes on November, Frodo. Don't use The Ring.
    [ Parent ]

    At least for God's sakes (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by lilburro on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:22:39 PM EST
    don't get tuckered out before the GE.

    As it's said over and over, Obama will probably win.  Then (as it has been said here) why doesn't he act like a frontrunner?  Why does he go negative?  There are a ton of ways for the Obama camp to handle the fact that Hillary is heavily favored in PA.  I think there must be a way they can both respect the voters of PA and the inevitable continuance of this race (let's face it, it will continue, Hillary isn't going anywhere, so deal) while picking off votes and still competing with her.  The attitude from the Obamacans at this point is pure petulance, as if they need a head start, all the space in the world, and added amenities to take on McCain.  Just freaking do it (and the comments I've heard Obama make recently on McCain have been good - and they make me like him).  But you can attack McCain without ignoring/invalidating the Dem primary voters to come; you can attack him and campaign for votes (showing future voters respect) instead of attacking him and having surrogates invalidate the race and prematurely declare that it's over.

    Obama needs to find a good narrative for losing PA.  A narrative that says "I'm gonna win anyway, neiner neiner" is to me at least incomplete.

    Indeed... (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by DudeE on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:45:43 PM EST
    ...given how dug in voters are at this point, his 'going negative' and launching attacks on Clinton serves no purpose but to piss off Clinton voters and embolden his supporters.

    The ploy is crystal clear; to sway superdelegates.

    [ Parent ]

    Exactly. Obama doesn't act as if he has won it (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:09:58 PM EST
    so I figure he hasn't won it.  So I keep hanging in there, and donating, to Clinton.

    Obama needs to work on understanding the theory of self-fulfilling prophecy.

    [ Parent ]

    PN doesn't matter (none / 0) (#24)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:46:00 PM EST
    NC does..... snark

    [ Parent ]
    What (none / 0) (#31)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:01:50 PM EST
    Could someone itemize for me what is the great BHO smear of HRC?  I read a lot, I haven't seen this great BHO attack against HRC.

    For blogs I spend most of my time at myDD, so my experience may not be representative of the world as a whole.

    [ Parent ]

    hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:20:47 PM EST
    "She'll say or do anything to win."

    [ Parent ]
    That's one (none / 0) (#126)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:04:00 PM EST
    I'd count that as unfair, especially since it was said before the release of schedules and the recent oversees video.  But, it would be fair to say "she'll do or say a whole lot with some reality-flexibility to win."

    Is there anything else BHO has done to smear HRC?

    [ Parent ]

    He has (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by nell on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:22:17 PM EST
    called her a liar more times than I care to count, he has said she has a serious "character gap," he has painted her and Bill Clinton as racists over and over again...just a partial list.

    If you really want to hear it straight from his campaign, just go to thepage.time.com and Mark Halperin has a post of a conference call his campaign did earlier this week where they threw, as Peter Doau roughly described it, the kitchen sink, the pots, the pans, the bowls, spooks, and forks, the garbage disposal, along with the trash can at Hillary.

    But of course that isn't harmful in the general election...no....not at all.

    [ Parent ]

    New definition (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Suma on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:40:23 PM EST
    of party unity - "Throw the kitchen sink, the pots, the pans, the bowls, spooks, and forks, the garbage disposal, along with the trash can at Hillary."

    My first comment on this site. Wish I did not have to be so caustic.

    [ Parent ]

    Just a quick clarification or two. (none / 0) (#161)
    by clapclappointpoint on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:26:20 PM EST
    Hillary did, in fact, repeat a claim or two about her trip to Tuzla that was factually incorrect.  These claims were used to bolster her CiC credentials.  If debunking factually incorrect statements by candidates isn't "vetting", I don't know what it.

    Also, the Clinton campaign coined the term "kitchen sink" in relation to negative campaigning.  Hillary herself remarked that it was "fun".

    [ Parent ]

    they were calling her a lair, dishonest, sneaky (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:52:00 PM EST
    the most secretive etc LONG before that.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#206)
    by nell on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:07:11 PM EST
    she messed up with Bosnia, I am a passionate Clinton supporter and this doesn't change that, but facts are facts. I see it as a misstatement because given that she was briefed that they were under threat of sniper fire (Gen. Togo West confirms this), I can see how if you tell a story enough times it turns into a different version.

    But I see how Obama supporters may see it as a lie (just as I see his back and forth on Wright as outright lies - he has told more than his fair share of whoppers). She messed up, I have no problem with her being called on that, but to say that she has a "character gap"? And as someone else pointed out, they have been calling her an evil liar long before this happened. Obama has told his fair share of whoppers. And I mean just the tones they were using...you would think they were talking about an evil dictator. It was really weird.

    [ Parent ]

    There's more to it. (none / 0) (#267)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:28:41 PM EST
    The thing about BHO and Wright is that he never lied.  His denials were specifically related to the incendiary YouTube clips, and it has been shown that he wasn't in church on any of those days.  Yes, he acknowledges hearing controversial things, but he didn't hear the incendiary clips until the media brought them to his attention.

    Also during the entire NAFTA/Canada thing he never lied.  He denied the accuracy of the CTV report.  And, it turned out that CTV was wrong on where, when, what side initiated, mode of the meeting (phone v. in person), who was meeting, and what was said.  So obviously BHO was correct.

    Also, if you parse Togo you'll find that his vagueness doesn't support HRC's particular claims.  And, now the pilot is saying that the landing was routine, i.e. no evasive "corkscrew."  And, he says that in the military he has never heard of people sitting on their flak jackets.  He said he only knows about that from the movie Red Dawn.  Mrs. Nixon had been to a war zone, so HRC wasn't the first since Mrs. Roosevelt.  And, HRC wasn't the first high level official to go to Bosnia after the fighting, even WJC had been there two months earlier.  So, even HRC's new story has a few flaws.

    The Bosnia thing is just one example.  What about saying she was "instrumental" to bringing peace to Northern Ireland when even her greatest supporters say she never had anything to do with the negotiations?  And, none of the books about the peace process mention her by name.

    What about SCHIP, FMLA, and NAFTA?

     

    [ Parent ]

    sure (5.00 / 1) (#240)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:43:58 PM EST
    First, if she'd really "say or do anything", we'd have seen the wright videos four months ago.

    Second, obama repeated the jeff gerth smear all fall.  (Do a search of daily howler on "obama" and "jeff gerth" - I haven't the energy).

    [ Parent ]

    For starters (5.00 / 3) (#118)
    by ChrisO on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:01:43 PM EST
    he's now referencing the Drudge photo and "as far as I know" as examples of Hillary's dirty campaigning. So he's endorsing Drudge's credibility while at the same time accusing Hillary of willfully spreading the Muslim rumors. That's essentially calling for his supporters to vilify her even more.

    Not to mention the fact that she stepped up to defend him on 60 Minutes, and he spits in her face in response. When his supporters said she should come out to defend him during the Wright uproar, all I could think was "Yeah, she tried that once already."

    [ Parent ]

    I'd count that as 1/3 a smear (none / 0) (#154)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:19:12 PM EST
    This is a silly road to go down, HRC just met with Scaife.  And WJC met with him many months ago.  He makes Drudge look like a saint.  And, Insight said that they were fed the madrass-lie from an HRC supporter.  They didn't name the HRC person, so there is plausible deniability, but hanging out with Scaife makes the deniability more questionable.  Also, the piece was about a year ago so it was a little early for the wingnuts to be gunning for BHO.

    The other thing is that Drudge is sleazy, but he get's a lot of good scoops.  For some reason he even gets NYT stories really early.

    Did you see sixty minutes?  That was a very strange way to answer the Muslim question.  The new (Pew?) poll says almost a quarter of dems think he is a Muslim.  Which is mind boggling considering that there has been so much coverage of excerpts from Christian pastor.

    What if Power said, "she's not a monster, as far as I know."


    [ Parent ]

    I did see the 60 minutes. Didn't find anything... (5.00 / 4) (#167)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:30:12 PM EST
    ...strange about her answer after she was badgered for the third time to answer a question she had already answered and if Samantha Powers had said "she isn't a monster...as far as I know"....I would have found that far preferable to "she's a monster." But that's just me.

    [ Parent ]
    do you even know how much of northeast (5.00 / 3) (#168)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:30:53 PM EST
    media Scaife owns, specifically in PA?  Probably not or you wouldn't be thinking that Clinton's meeting with Scaife or talking to his media empire is so strange.  

    You want press in PA?  You deal with Scaife regardless of personal opinion.  Think Hillary doesn't have to hold her nose when talking to the person most influential in the destruction of the Clinton WH?  But guess what, she's a politician who needs the media if she is to have a chance to stay competitive so she is doing as she must.

     

    [ Parent ]

    That was the same morning as (none / 0) (#198)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:55:54 PM EST
    the press interviews, wasn't it?

    [ Parent ]
    Drudge may get some scoops (5.00 / 3) (#252)
    by ChrisO on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:04:25 PM EST
    but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have an agenda. There is literally nothing to tie the Clinton campaign to that photo other than Drudge's word. He says he "obtained" the photo, not a term you'd use if it was sent to you. He never said who sent it, never said who received it, and never even revealed its entire contents. If he had gone to any reputable newspaper with a story sourced like that, they would have told him to get lost. Instead we have Obama refeencing the story as absolutely true.

    As for Scaife, Hillary didn't go on a romantic weekend with him. She met with the editorial board. That's how candidates get endorsements. It's the second largest paper in Pittsburgh. I'm sure it would satisfy Obama supporters to have her turn up her nose at the paper in order to indicate her displeasure, but that would be just stupid. When the right wing rag the Las Vegas Sun endorsed Obama before the Nevada caucuses, I don't recall him turning them away.

    And really, it gets tiring addressing the 60 Minutes story. Hillary's first repsonse was "Of course not. There's no basis for that." She then went on to say he wasn't a Muslim several times. Yet Obama supporters have erased that part of the interview from history. Whenever someone starts flogging that story, I respond with her actual quotes the first time she answered the question. I have literally never had an Obama supporter even acknowledge that those quotes existed. My rebuttals just disappear into thin air.

    [ Parent ]

    And Obama met wtih Scaife's board (none / 0) (#259)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:16:15 PM EST
    so I presume that means we can count on you as a Clinton supporter now.  No?  Then what are these attacks for?

    [ Parent ]
    The issue was (5.00 / 1) (#265)
    by marcellus on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:24:19 PM EST
    with a week of "no comments" to Wright questions.  Then a meeting with Scaife, the question was asked and answered.  She did what she had to do.  I thought  Wright's comments were racist and should be denounced, but Sean Hannity and Newsmax are ready to twist them into a race war, which is unfortunate.

    [ Parent ]
    I wish (5.00 / 8) (#11)
    by OxyCon on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:31:53 PM EST
    ...they'd post Feingold's comment over at HuffPo just so I could read the comments:
    "Senator Feingold, I used to really like you, but now I can't stand the sight of you! (insert race card here). Blah blah blah. Hillary Clinton is evil and her supporters are all jerks. We must all vote for Obama because he'll unify the entire country!

    Just as likely... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by DudeE on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:49:07 PM EST
    ...the spin will be that Feingold is trolling for a cabinet post - the evil sycophant.

    And of course Obama's endorsements come from a pure heart with no vision of any quid pro quo.  They are the purest forms in politics.

    [ Parent ]

    I hear they call them (none / 0) (#33)
    by OxyCon on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:03:47 PM EST
    ...Newkinda politics. Something about Hope and Unity and being the ones we wait for.

    [ Parent ]
    It went up at dkos (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Ben Masel on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:05:31 PM EST
    here


    Keep your eyes on November, Frodo. Don't use The Ring.
    [ Parent ]
    I don't got there... (none / 0) (#209)
    by ACitizen on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08:43 PM EST
    ....so you link is wasted. I don't got there not because they are so pro-Obama but rather because I recall quite clearly that Sinclair Lewis's famous quote makes no reference to whether the figure he so aptly described is approaching from the Right or the Left.

    'It can't happen here.'

    ....is starting to sound just as applicable to the 'sphere as it has been for the Bush term in office.

    [ Parent ]

    I read it...ugh (5.00 / 3) (#233)
    by Jackson Hunter on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:37:38 PM EST
    It's actually quite illuminating.  The basic consensus is that HRC is a Republican racist c*nt who is in bed with the VRWC to destroy poor little humble Obama, so why is Russ telling us to cool it.  It'd be funny if it weren't so sad and debilitating to the Party.

    Seriously, don't they read their own blog over there?  One guy said something like "why is he picking on us?"  How about some cheese with your whine, you don't see the enviroment that you have at DKos?  How many have written GBCW diaries at MyDD?  Are they all just a bunch of 20 year olds or something over there at DKos or what?  I just don't get the vitriol, and I for one and sick and tired of being called a racist every two freakin' seconds in all honesty.  If all they have is "You're a bigot" then we can kiss November goodbye because that is not a winning argument.

    That said, I will gladly vote for Obama or Clinton, but I have had my fill of his supporters and they super-sensitive little egos.

    My first comment here, I'm glad to be aboard.

    Jackson

    [ Parent ]

    Are they under hidden comments? (none / 0) (#258)
    by marcellus on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:13:51 PM EST
    for people who will not go to Dkos...I just checked on Fri at 9 Pac. and there's not a c** on that page and the only b** was from a Clinton supporter accusing Obama supporters of thinking it.(I can't see the hidden comments so I can't guarantee trolls, is that where you saw the comments Jackson?)  

    The page does have derogatory mentions of Hillary's appearances with Scaife and Foxnews.

    [ Parent ]

    Sorry, a clarification... (none / 0) (#270)
    by Jackson Hunter on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:44:32 PM EST
    I never saw that actual word, Marcellus, I should have put it in quotes.  I do apologize for that, but that is the general attitude over there, the venom screams that word, even if they don't use it.  I wasn't trying to mislead (and no cracks about lacking sleep please-:)), but I was misleading and I apologize.  AFAIK, no one there has used that word and I apologize to them and Sen. Obama's supporters.  I'm just getting frustrated with all of the venom.  I'm a 51/49 Clinton supporter, I think she has a slight edge in experience and ideas, but Obama is a good man who would make a great President.  I am becoming what I am beholding I guess, and every day I lean more and more for Clinton.

    I forgot, words and their meanings actually matter in our part of the blogosphere (and I mean the whole Left, even the Obama blogs).  I still read the left side of DKos, but the diaries are usually whining dreck.  AMERICA blog was nuked from my faves and will never return, which is a shame because sometimes you could really learn something there.  But once Avairosis claimed he "knew things" and that he'd destroy Clinton.  (And no, for obvious reasons, I can't link to it, it was a couple of weeks ago and I've let that ship sail, I'm never going back to that blog again.  And I'm consistent, if this blog threatened such underhanded garbage I'd be out of here in a second.  I don't like underhanded bullies.

    What do Kos, Abvairosis, and John Cole all have in common?  They are all former Republicans.  Maybe that should clue some people in on things, as I feel their CDS is all just left over flotsam from their time in the wilderness, and they are simply not rational in their hatred of the Clintons.

    I was NEVER a Republican, and I will NEVER be one.  So before we let these former Republicans decide our nominee for us, maybe we should just keep on voting for a bit and see what happens.  But like I said, and I mean it, I will gladly vote for Obama no matter how much his supporters may irritate me.

    Jackson

    [ Parent ]

    Welcome, Jackson, and thanks (none / 0) (#260)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:18:09 PM EST
    for scanning DKos for me, so I don't have to do there.  <shudder>

    [ Parent ]
    Ugh, I had to go there (none / 0) (#269)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:32:37 PM EST
    and see you take a shot at Bill Clinton, Ben.  Uh huh.

    [ Parent ]
    good on feingold (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by Turkana on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:31:58 PM EST
    but will it change the behavior of the obamabots? no. there are plenty of smart, sane, obama supporters, but the obamabots are viral and psychotic.

    Additions (none / 0) (#34)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:04:15 PM EST
    If you added KoolAid, cult, and messiah your argument would be even stronger.

    [ Parent ]
    sadly (none / 0) (#77)
    by Turkana on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:39:03 PM EST
    you're right.

    [ Parent ]
    As are many Clinton supporters (none / 0) (#72)
    by jtaylorr on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:36:43 PM EST
    One must go no farther than MyDD to see that.

    [ Parent ]
    You might be surprised (none / 0) (#106)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:57:38 PM EST
    that many don't go there.

    [ Parent ]
    True Arrogance from Obama Supporters (5.00 / 16) (#22)
    by stevenb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:45:20 PM EST
    I actually think that most Obama supporters -- whether online Obamamaniacs or offline "folks" -- believe Obama can win the Presidency without the backing of Clinton supporters. That, BTW, is impossible. Why, you ask?  Republicans are 80% behind McCain, the Dems. are 50/50 split between Clinton and Obama.  Percentage wise, that means the Repubs. will win because of, dare I say it, more actual, real votes from actual, real voters.

    Since I'm on the topic, I believe this arrogance on the part of Obama supporters is because Obama has shown no leadership in calming down his own constituency.  The Obama/Axelrod brain trust is surely keeping quiet with the bloggers and online voices because they want to have this negativity.

    Look, all it would take is for Obama to make one of historical speeches, directed to his constituency, to say "be gracious, be kind, do not smear and vilify Senator Clinton, because we need her constituencies support to win the Presidency."  But, he doesn't say this, although he often refers to walking the "high road" in this campaign.

    If anyone can show me that Obama is trying to manage his constituency or show him equally supporting a unified Dem. party (a la Clinton many, many times), I'll shut up.

    PS - Also, if Obama wasn't worried about losing this nomination, why is he trying soooooo hard to smear and tear up Clinton...shouldn't he just be sitting pretty? Hmm?

    You are (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by sas on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:22:36 PM EST
    exactly right.

    Thursday, Hillary said the party should be unified in November.  No one should seriously consider McCain.  I have heard her say this several times.

    I have never heard him say anything remotely like that (until after she said it yesterday).

    I don't even really think he is a democrat sometimes.  I think he uses the party as a means to an end.

    Anyway, his supporters on some blogs are so vile toward Hillary, that I have been completely turned off to him.  He could stop it if he wanted.

    So, what will I do in November?  I think I will probably sit out.  

    [ Parent ]

    he can't (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:48:03 PM EST
    because his wife is on record saying that if Hillary won the nomination their support would be "maybe."  Hard to throw your wife under the bus if you wouldn't throw your mentor under the bus.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't sit out (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:57:22 PM EST
    write in  ;)

    [ Parent ]
    you're asking too much (5.00 / 4) (#95)
    by djork on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:49:05 PM EST
    Obama can't even speak up to his minister about inflammatory things said in his own church. Why should we expect any more from him in leading the Democratic party?


    [ Parent ]
    As an Obama supporter (5.00 / 1) (#220)
    by marcellus on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:23:58 PM EST
    what I hear sounds different.

    Standard line from Obama about Clinton (from Mar 21):

    "Senator Clinton is smart, she is capable, she is tenacious, she would be a vast improvement over the status quo, all right? there's no doubt that.  and you're right the differences on issues are not immense."

    Standard line from Clinton about Obama (from Mar 6):

    "Look I have said that Sen. McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, I will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002....since we know now Sen. McCain will be the nominee for the Republican party, national security will be front-and-center in this election, we all know that.  I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate that we can cross the Commander-in-Chief threshold...I believe I've done that, Sen. McCain has done that, and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."

    Her comments this week were a welcome change.


    [ Parent ]

    Going negative may drive down turnout? (none / 0) (#84)
    by ineedalife on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:42:05 PM EST
    I know Obama has to pay lip service to his get out the new vote schtick, but it is in his interest to drive down turnout now. Going negative usually does that. Even if Hillary wins by 25% margins in the rest of the states, if the turnout is down, she will not over take him in the 48 state popular vote. If turnout stays at historic proportions she can get there without massive victories.

    [ Parent ]
    I am a long time democrat and 63 yrs old (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:49:02 PM EST
    Have never voted for a republican in my life before....Hope I don't this time...Probably will sit it out...but there is one thing I definately wont give away...and that is my vote...I refuse to have the twisted media and the more twisted pundits cram one candidate down my throat...Particularly if two states have been disinfranchiced...if you are afraid of the revote than how on earth will you deal with November...

    I live in solid blue state.... (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by ineedalife on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:44:54 PM EST
    so I can cast a protest vote. If it gets close enough in my state for my vote to make a difference the race is lost anyways.

    [ Parent ]
    Me too. (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:48:35 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I'm writing in. Not a protest. (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:54:46 PM EST
    Just my vote  ;)

    [ Parent ]
    I'm (5.00 / 2) (#227)
    by tek on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:28:24 PM EST
    a boomer, too. Also a lifelong Dem.  People ask how can we think about voting for McCain or sitting it out, but I'll tell you what, I'm sick of having a demagogue in the White House, sick of holding my nose and voting for some loser like Kerry because that's all the Party can come up with.  I'm not going to help foist another loser on the American People.  At some point, a person has to fall back on their principles.

    [ Parent ]
    well... (1.00 / 3) (#43)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:12:22 PM EST
    Assuming your comments weren't rhetorical I'll point out that BHO was in favor of a fair revote in MI, and the FL revote fell apart because of feasibility problems that have nothing to do with BHO.

    [ Parent ]
    you are sadly misinformed about both (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:14:57 PM EST
    revotes and if you go back in the history of this blogger, BTD, you will see why it is so...Obama was totally at the base of blocking both states...Sad but true...

    [ Parent ]
    Speaking Of BTD (none / 0) (#50)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:21:18 PM EST
    He is not a twisted pundit, at least he has not been while supporting BHO. Doesn't his opinion supporting Obama count for anything in your book?

    [ Parent ]
    squeaky.. (5.00 / 2) (#261)
    by Rainsong on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:19:53 PM EST
    BTD has been consistent in his support and opinion.

    Just my take, is that BTD believes Obama is the more electable in the GE because of his media status, and also supports what I call the "math theory":  ie the math alone will enable BHO to take the nomination with sufficient 'legitimacy' to soothe the Clinton voters. Thats why he is arguing against continued demonising of Clinton, so as not to alienate Clinton voters any more than they already are.  

    But that said, some of us disagree with BTD and hold different opinions. I personally don't see those differences as a sin, or a crime, and one of the reasons I like coming to this site. Only time will tell who's guesses, views, opinions etc were closest to the mark.

    FWIW - I dont think the "math theory" will hold a lot with Clinton supporters. Some will see it as just Party spin.

    As for the media status - quite a significant minority (especially Clinton voters) aren't buying the media spin now, so I don't see that media success as evidence that it will be so incredibly successful in the GE even if it does continue, and outweighs the Republican campaign machine. But I could be wrong, huh?

    However, I do agree with BTD on the Clinton-demonisation, its not doing Obama much good and will damage him in the GE in loss of support, not just in votes but in campaign ground-troops as well, and possibly down-ticket for other Dems as well.

    [ Parent ]

    I personally love BTD and love his posts... (none / 0) (#56)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:25:33 PM EST
    but his support of Obama, is tepid at best, and I also disagree that Obama will get the more favored press...Sadly cannot prove it until it is too late tho...I really don't think of BTD as an Obama supporter as much as I think of him as an extremely honest man..rare to find...

    [ Parent ]
    He Is A Democrat Supporter First (none / 0) (#64)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:31:01 PM EST
    And an Obama supporter second. That is a good example, imo. At least in these times, given what we have to work with.  

    [ Parent ]
    Yep (none / 0) (#91)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:47:40 PM EST
    Here is the official word on FL:

    http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpoin
    tsmemo.com/2008/03/breaking_florida_
    will_not_hold.php

    The MI proposal needed to exclude the BHO supporters who originally went for their second choice or to be strategic in the Repub race.  Remember everyone (including HRC) knew that the D election wouldn't count, and BHO wasn't on the ballot.

    Aside: How do I imbed a URL so I don't go over the margins?

    [ Parent ]

    Didn't he run an 'uncommitted' campaign there? (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:03:44 PM EST
    anyone who voted Dem should be eligible in a revote. if you voted Repub, too bad. It's a DEM primary they are trying to win.

    [ Parent ]
    TPM Central (none / 0) (#142)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:13:49 PM EST
    is not a valid source of anything but Obama-centric propaganda.

    [ Parent ]
    Dem Doc (none / 0) (#158)
    by 1jpb on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:22:59 PM EST
    It's a Dem document reprinted.

    It can be found many places.

    So what about the content of my comment?

    [ Parent ]

    use the link button at the top (none / 0) (#203)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:59:51 PM EST
    of your comment box. First type your text, then hightlight it and click the link button and paste in the url. It's very simple.

    [ Parent ]
    What? (5.00 / 4) (#104)
    by lansing quaker on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:56:30 PM EST
    A FAIR revote?

    A fair revote in Michigan is a Primary.  Not a caucus.  I vote absentee.  I could never attend a caucus.  Neither could my 82 year old Grandmother (who, surprisingly, supports OBAMA) as she has bone marrow cancer, and also votes absentee.  And she is very political.

    As far as those "Republican" voters, aka those who switched Party Affiliation?  Screw them.  I thought the Obamasphere's rallying cry to "VOTE MITT AND MESS WITH REPUBLICANS!" was bad then, and I have no sympathy.  Stay home and tell the leadership you're upset over the Primary fracas, or go and try and "screw" with the other side.

    Karma is Karma.

    A primary election re-vote is fair for Michigan.  What else is "fair?"

    50/50 delegate split is absolutely unfair.  That's not even a vote.  It's just saying "Michigan counts, but not really, as no one actually wins!"  

    Give me a break.

    [ Parent ]

    Wow. Athyrio. I am a long time Democrat and 63 (none / 0) (#63)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:30:37 PM EST
    years old too. What you said.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL at least we agree on the issues so far (none / 0) (#67)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:33:08 PM EST
    I just wish I could see a way out of it...I don't....

    [ Parent ]
    Derridog it would be fun to exchange (none / 0) (#68)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:34:54 PM EST
    email addys and chat privately and see how much we agree...How do we do that....

    [ Parent ]
    I don't know. Is there a way? I'd like to do that. (none / 0) (#80)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:40:08 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    me too.....I am on yahoo messenger are you?? (none / 0) (#88)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:45:19 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    put your email addresses in your (none / 0) (#98)
    by TheRefugee on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:51:49 PM EST
    personal info for this site

    [ Parent ]
    But can everyone contact you then? (none / 0) (#101)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:53:11 PM EST
    That could be a problem for me. I get 45 emails a day already.

    [ Parent ]
    Pop it in (none / 0) (#119)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:01:57 PM EST
    real quick so you can exchange.  Then remove.  We won't look.

    [ Parent ]
    what the heck do this one as I rarely use it (none / 0) (#153)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:18:46 PM EST
    athyrioranch_884@msn.com    

    [ Parent ]
    Okay. Got it. I just emailed you. Cream City? (none / 0) (#172)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:33:26 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    The problem with doing that is it displays my addy (none / 0) (#111)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:00:01 PM EST
    for all the world to see...Not good with some of these rabid Obamabots...

    [ Parent ]
    Suggestion (none / 0) (#122)
    by Step Beyond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:03:05 PM EST
    Either just put your email address up for just a couple of minutes. Or quickly sign up for a yahoo email then just use that one to exchange email address.

    [ Parent ]
    Why don't you e-mail J or BTD (none / 0) (#127)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:04:19 PM EST
    and have them forward?

    [ Parent ]
    That's a good idea, if they wouldn't mind. I'm not (none / 0) (#143)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:14:26 PM EST
    sure. Maybe if they say yes on this thread? or they might tell us to keep on topic.

    [ Parent ]
    Hi, I have a university email address. I'm not (none / 0) (#124)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:03:12 PM EST
    comfortable with publishing it online.  I'm racking my brains to see how we could do this but I'm coming up blank.  I'd be happy to speak with Cream City too.  We all sound like we have a lot in common.

    [ Parent ]
    I'll email you with (none / 0) (#204)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:00:49 PM EST
    each other's address since you both want to do it.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm just a kid in first grade (none / 0) (#99)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:51:59 PM EST
    when you were in fifth -- but I so appreciate reading both of you and others here, too.  "Women of a certain age" are we, and your retelling of your experience resonates so much with me.  Thanks.

    [ Parent ]
    Cream City if you like send me an email (none / 0) (#235)
    by athyrio on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:37:58 PM EST
    at the below posted email addy and I will share it with derridog...thanks and would love chatting with u....

    athyrioranch_884@msn.com

    [ Parent ]

    I respect Feingold a great deal (5.00 / 6) (#30)
    by stillife on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 07:56:49 PM EST
    and his advice is sound.  I've never been particularly impressed by Obama as a candidate, but I would have been more inclined to vote for him if not for the nasty behavior of his supporters on the Internet.  

    After months of Clinton-bashing, at this point my reaction is, "You hate my candidate? Well, fine! I hate yours, too, and I won't vote for him in the GE!"  

    Infantile?  Perhaps.  There is more to my reluctance to vote for Obama than sheer spite, but I've gotta admit, that's a factor.  I resent the way he's taken the Dem base for granted and assumed that Hillary supporters will just fall in line.

    I guess I'm like an Italian (a/k/a garlic-nose) with Alzheimer's.  As the joke goes, they forget everything but their grudges.

    Again (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by sas on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:25:50 PM EST
    you are right.

    Why would I want to support someone who has tacitly allowed this vileness go on?  When they say awful things about Hillary I take it personally.

    I have never voted for any Republican presidential candidate, and I never saw this coming.

    But I feel he is so unright for the job.  What to do?  


    [ Parent ]

    Yes. I think that it is very important that he (5.00 / 6) (#73)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:36:43 PM EST
    does not tell his supporters to stop. But even more important is that he arouses this kind of emotional viciousness in the first place. Anyone who can conjure up this kind of non-thinking mob mentality in his supporters is not someone I can support. This is too much like Hitler.   I know he sounds so sweetly reasonable, but the Democratic party is split now because of him. We have lost the coalition of blacks with hispanics and progressive whites that has held us together.  He doesn't care about that either. He's been actively creating that situation by calling the Clinton's racists in a blatant attempt to take the black vote away from her.  He's also a fraud.  He copies words, phrases, pauses, inflections from others. He takes on a Martin Luther King religious tone when he speaks.  He is a fabulous actor who reads lines as though he means them.

    He scares me.

    [ Parent ]

    mob mentality, charisma and fanaticism (5.00 / 3) (#236)
    by noholib on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:39:00 PM EST
    What's the difference between inspiration by a worthy leader, rock-star celebrity appeal, and a charismatic leader who can turn large numbers of people into vicious unthinking mobs?  I don't have the answers but I wonder about this.  And I too really get nervous when charisma carries the day rather than rational argument and analysis of policies.  I always applaud the attempt to be clear-headed and sceptical, not to be dragged along by others' enthusiasms.  One has to try to think for oneself.
    I am not moved by Senator Obama's calls for post-partisanship; they sound suspiciously like the "triangulation" that was decried only a short while ago by so many supposed liberals or progressives--or giving away the Democratic store, to put it more colloquially.  I am dismayed by his personal attacks on Senator Clinton's character.  I see someone with the gifts of intelligence, good looks, charm and a silver tongue, but with little solid experience and with  considerable arrogance. His judgment was good about the war, but it has been poor in many other areas, e.g. voting for Cheney's energy bill; wanting to vote for John Roberts as Chief Justice; his long-term association with Rezsko and not telling the truth about it--five billable hours became a two-decade long relationship and hundred of thousands of dollars; his not being able to stick to his story about Rev. Wright: did he or did he not hear his full-throated comments?; his willingness to keep private contractors in Iraq; his referring in the last couple of days to the length of this primary campaign with an analogy to the Bataan death march -- really, this flippant remark betrays such a lack of historical judgment and moral perspective that it's callous and almost obscene.

    He has encouraged adulation by his supporters and an aura of religious conversion.  Not used to being criticized or called to account, he has at times become very prickly and ornery.  Oh yes, it's too much for the press to ask a candidate to answer more than eight questions in one session!

    He and his surrogates are quick to fling charges of racism at others, but he has tacitly condoned several objectionable remarks about race, women, and sexual orientation made by others in his orbit or by those who support him (e.g. McClurkin, MSNBC, Wright).  

    Yes, I'd be much happier with less charisma, more reason, more policy analysis (see for example Krugman's columns in NY Times, or eriposte on leftcoaster), and more commitment to long-term  core Democratic values such as universal health care.

    [ Parent ]

    WTF? (none / 0) (#81)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:41:06 PM EST
    Obama like Hitler????? You sound scary.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm not saying he's out goose-stepping. I'm (5.00 / 5) (#94)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:48:57 PM EST
    saying he doesn't appear to mind arousing hatred in his supporters.  I first noticed this on Kos, when all the Edwards suporters (I being one) were innocently cheering on our candidate  and the Hillary people were able to speak to one another without their conversations being hijacked and without being told that Hillary was a lot of words I can't say on this blog.

    At first I thought Kos would do something or say something to stop this and then it got more and more abusive. I finally left.  Then the MSNBC boyz club started in and some of the girls who wanted to be in the boyz club were also piling on Hillary.   Now, its what Riverdaughter calls a Haka -- men wearing masks and sticking out their tongues and trying to frighten and intimidate their opponent into submission.

    Obama never says a thing to stop it.  His advisors stir it up. His wife enters into the fray, saying she wouldn't necessarily support Hillary in the general if she won. His chosen superdelegates engage in WWTSBQ!

    Maybe you have missed this behavior?  What planet could you be on?

    [ Parent ]

    The Nuremberg Rallies; (none / 0) (#113)
    by Arcadianwind on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:00:14 PM EST
    You've never seen them?

    [ Parent ]
    Godwin's Law (none / 0) (#123)
    by clapclappointpoint on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:03:08 PM EST
    You lose.

    [ Parent ]
    George Burns said it well. (none / 0) (#144)
    by lentinel on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:14:41 PM EST
    The secret to being a good actor is sincerity.

    If you can fake that, you've got it made.

    [ Parent ]

    Hitler? (none / 0) (#232)
    by marcellus on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:36:03 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I dunno (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by stillife on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:37:48 PM EST
    I'm in a quandary.  If all Obama supporters were like BTD, it would be much easier for me to make peace.  And I do believe the attitude comes from the top down.  Obama has done nothing to quell the viciousness of his supporters, so I have to believe that he tacitly approves.  To paraphrase Barbara Bush, it's working out very well for him.

    Even my mom is not immune!  She just turned 82 yesterday and is very into politics (God bless her) but she is a total Obamaniac (she was a Deaniac in 2004).  She's coming to visit next week I don't know if I'm willing to let her use my laptop to visit her favorite sites (Huffpo, DKos and America Blog).  I think I'll try to turn her on to TL.

    I don't think I could bring myself to vote for McCain but I live in NY, which is solidly blue, so  my vote doesn't matter that much.  OTOH, I feel like a hypocrite not voting b/c I'm always exhorting my kids to vote, vote, vote!  

    [ Parent ]

    You need to vote downticket. If we have McCain, (5.00 / 3) (#159)
    by derridog on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:25:27 PM EST
    which I personally believe is a given, if Obama is our candidate, we NEED to have a Democratic Congress with a fillibuster proof majority to stop the 100 year war, the tax cuts that will make the economic situation worse, more Alitos on the Supreme Court, and the privitization of Social Security.  

    If we have that majority, maybe we can weather four years of McCain. He doesn't look like he could last longer than that.

    [ Parent ]

    I will Vote down the Ticket, but not for Obama. (none / 0) (#184)
    by ruthy on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 09:45:34 PM EST
    Voting down the ticket is the only reason I will vote in the GE.  I simply will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee.  He is a fraud, and he is not qualified to be president of these United States of America. I will either leave the president block blank or write in Clinton's name.  A vote for Obama, IMO, will be a vote for another four years of George Bush.

    [ Parent ]
    Maybe Here (none / 0) (#86)
    by squeaky on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 08:44:31 PM EST
    You should take a trip down to Mississippi. The Obama supporters there seem to be quite reasonable.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh, let's hope we're solidly blue. n/t (none / 0) (#210)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 10:12:15 PM EST