home

McCain Loves Dance Music

Given that his political positions are diametrically opposed to Hillary Clinton's, this is apparently how John McCain hopes to attract Hillary supporters:

Senator John McCain’s campaign is taking a more lighthearted approach to chatting up these women, at least in a new blog it debuted last night, The McCain Report.

The latest entry says, “Attention disaffected Hillary supporters, John McCain is a huge ABBA fan. Seriously.” Embedded is a YouTube video with the famous refrain:

If you change your mind,
I’m the first in line
Honey I’m still free
Take a chance on me

Gag me.

< Saturday Evening Open Thread | Late night: The Shape of Things To Come >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Well, (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Blue Jean on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:06:53 PM EST
    at least McCain didn't sing "Kiss him goodbye--Sha na na na, sha na na na, hey, hey, hey, goodbye!"

    Sorry (5.00 / 14) (#3)
    by Emma on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:09:35 PM EST
    I thought it was funny.

    I'll join you in the naughty corner, (5.00 / 9) (#18)
    by eleanora on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:24:36 PM EST
    because that's hilarious. A light touch is worth a lot when people are sore from being poked all the time. McCain's much more agile than I ever would have predicted, considering his age and temper problems. Do you hear the drums, Obama? :D

    [ Parent ]
    The corner is pretty crowded (5.00 / 10) (#81)
    by Valhalla on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:16:26 PM EST
    Because I thought it was hysterical.  I love it when people have a sense of humor about themselves.

    [ Parent ]
    Humor (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by vml68 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:38:16 PM EST
    I liked it when Mcain was on John Stewart and Stewart asked him if he knew what his Secret Service codename was, and Mcain responded "I think it is Jerk".. :-)
    I can't imagine BO saying that.

    [ Parent ]
    Also, on TV tonight, they (5.00 / 4) (#136)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:14:41 AM EST
    had a tiny segment of him telling this story to an audience:

    A man asked me if I knew that I looked a lot like John McCain, and I said "Yes."  Then he said "Doesn't that piss you off?"  

    ;)

    [ Parent ]

    I did too and I also cracked up at (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Teresa on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:47:14 PM EST
    "gag me" from TChris.

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah that is pretty funny (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by daria g on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:12 PM EST
    I took it as a deadpan joke, which I'm sure it was.

    [ Parent ]
    Me, too. Hey, I love Abba (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by Cream City on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:37:36 PM EST
    and I've developed a real distaste for the other candidate's music -- y'know, hip-hop like "Dirt on My Shoulder" (and dogs**t on my shoe).  

    Maybe McCain is gonna play Abba at his rallies and lead us in sing-alongs -- after all, he does like to laugh at himself, unlike another candidate I could mention.  I'd sure fit in a lot better at McCain rallies, as I'd even know all the words.  

    And they even would be words that wouldn't shame me, the candidate, the party, or the country.  It's a concept.  

    [ Parent ]

    Better this than (5.00 / 3) (#183)
    by janarchy on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:40:41 AM EST
    "99 problems and a B!tch ain't one of them".

    [ Parent ]
    WHAT? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Mary Mary on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:10:32 PM EST
    He dropped the McCain girls? I LOVED the "Raining McCain" one they did where his head was floating around.

    I liked the McCain girls (none / 0) (#8)
    by chrisblask on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:14:41 PM EST
    mostly because they were Purest Snark...

    ...and he didn't know they were.

    [ Parent ]

    I don't think that is true.. (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by Clinton2012 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:17:37 PM EST
    Given that his political positions are diametrically opposed to Hillary Clinton's

    but what is Obama's plan to attract the woman voters... listen to her speech of endorsement from computer because he was too busy playing golf?

    I think we should not wich hunt McCain like Obama did against Clinton.. I ask all Obama supporters to not demean McCain with the same cunningness they used against Clinton.. let it be about actual policies and not the beating about the bush.

    Sen. Clinton thinks it is true (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by chrisblask on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:21:54 PM EST
    and I agree that the opposition to McCain should be policies, not pointless attacks about what music he likes or whether he watches a speech on a computer or a TV.

    -chris

    [ Parent ]

    As a Clinton supporter (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by standingup on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:29:14 PM EST
    I think it will help if we can cut down some of the unnecessary sarcasm in our comments too.  Jeralyn has politely provided guidelines for continued posting and I think we should try to respect what she has asked.

    [ Parent ]
    Instead of following the link (3.75 / 4) (#17)
    by RalphB on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:22:08 PM EST
    in the post, you might try this one which goes to a nice piece about Clinton getting out.

    McCainReport

    [ Parent ]

    A very interesting take on her talk (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Cream City on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:37:15 AM EST
    as I had not been able to think that far yet into what wasn't said, appreciating so much what was.

    Thanks for the link.  Bookmarked, as this is going to be fascinating to watch us being wooed.  Points to the linked site for showing that it thinks we think about serious foreign policy issues.

    And it will be fun to see who stumbles first in figuring us out.  Hint: the first candidate who has ads for feminine hygiene products will lose a lot of points, for real. :-)

    [ Parent ]

    I'm looking forward (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Nadai on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:51:56 AM EST
    to seeing who McCain picks for his VP - will it be geography, ideology, or demography that rules?

    [ Parent ]
    Ditto. And if it's demography (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Cream City on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:29:27 AM EST
    as is rumored, won't this be fun to watch?  Fascinating, after all these decades of the Dems just taking almost 60% of their voters for granted.  

    [ Parent ]
    So you think the man (3.40 / 5) (#44)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:48:16 PM EST
    Who asked "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father was Janet Reno" deserves a break?

    I suppose we could limit discussion to 100 years in Iraq, or McCain's health care program  for the healthy and wealthy, or his belief that the economy is fundamentally sound (which sorta sounds familiar)...

    [ Parent ]

    that joke pissed me off too (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by bjorn on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:51:02 PM EST
    I remember getting my brothers to back off support for McCain at the time because of that joke alone

    [ Parent ]
    Jayzus (5.00 / 9) (#62)
    by Emma on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:59:23 PM EST
    We've all heard the "joke".  Stop frickin' repeating it at every opportunity.  It just makes me mad at you.  Why is it okay to add insult to injury to Chelsea by repeating that?

    [ Parent ]
    I guess she thinks the 100th time (5.00 / 7) (#74)
    by RalphB on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:12:14 PM EST
    she posts the same thing, it'll start to matter.  Does royally piss me off to have it repeated, but not at McCain.  

    [ Parent ]
    So let me get this straight... (2.66 / 9) (#86)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:21:43 PM EST
    ...I am supposed to read sexism into anything Senator Obama says about Senator Clinton that is not 100% positive as dismissive or sexist or hateful, but Senator McCain says and does openly sexist, dismissive and hateful things and you get upset when reminded of that because...why?  

     And people who criticize McCain for making those comments are not endorsing the substance of the message or harming Chelsea (or Janet Reno, who was the primary (sexist) target of that cheap piece of crap joke, but I guess she doesn't matter).  What they ARE doing is pointing out what should be obvious to people who plan to vote for McCain (or are considering it) because they believe Senator Clinton was treated unfairly by Senator Obama, and yes, fairly or unfairly, forcing you to confront the harsh light of day.  So drop the holier than thou, mad as hell attitude.  

    [ Parent ]

    How's that? (5.00 / 13) (#139)
    by hitchhiker on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:21:17 AM EST
    drop the holier than thou, mad as hell attitude.  

    I just spent the last six months having that precise attitude shoved down my throat every time I encountered another utterly sold Obama supporter.

    Now it's not okay, good to know.

    Look, I think the point here is that it's just going to be a lot more difficult to use the tactics that worked against HRC against McCain.  She was the most unpopular woman in America, remember?  You could accuse her of anything (even coveting an assassination, for the love of God) and it would stick.  

    It's not going to be quite that easy from now on, and I'm definitely not going to help turn those hoses on him.

    [ Parent ]

    Since you seem to know quite a bit (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:33:38 AM EST
    about Obama, could you please post some of the jokes he has told here or anything that shows he has a great sense of humor?  It doesn't have to be anything fancy...

    I don't believe I've ever read anything that has said anything about Obama's sense of humor.  

    I believe a good sense of humor is an important thing for a leader to have.  

    [ Parent ]

    Well he (5.00 / 14) (#147)
    by LoisInCo on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:39:06 AM EST
    said his healthcare plan was Universal Health Care. I thought that was pretty funny.

    [ Parent ]
    Diet Pepsi (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by eleanora on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:45:21 AM EST
    all over my monitor! TY for the LOL :D

    [ Parent ]
    alec, surely you're not that stupid, or (5.00 / 4) (#206)
    by cpinva on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:23:32 AM EST
    are you? one huge problem with that is, you can't fix stupid.

    So let me get this straight...
    ...I am supposed to read sexism into anything Senator Obama says about Senator Clinton that is not 100% positive as dismissive or sexist or hateful, but Senator McCain says and does openly sexist, dismissive and hateful things and you get upset when reminded of that because...why?

    ok, for 9,337th time, for those of you riding the short bus. no, you aren't, unless, for reasons not made clear in your post, you feel so compelled.

    there's been enough spewed forth from the obama campaign, and its frothing MSM minions, that is clearly sexist, bordering (actually, nearly falling into the abyss) on misogony, that one needn't "read" anything, it's flagrantly obvious, even to self proclaimed dullards. even some from sen. obama himself, in a good way of course.

    if you've not noticed it, then you haven't been paying attention. your choice. but then, don't come in here, or anywhere thinking people reside, and act all confused. maybe it isn't an act. worse, i think.

    like i said, you can't fix stupid.

    [ Parent ]

    How about talking about the only major (5.00 / 14) (#79)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:15:23 PM EST
    candidate (Obama) who gay-baited to win a primary election.  Do we want to talk about that?

    Both men have deep flaws when it comes to their character and tolerance with respect to those who aren't straight men.  I just don't think it's going to be a winning argument for either of them.

    [ Parent ]

    Absolutely true (5.00 / 4) (#88)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:22:40 PM EST
    Which is why I default to party and issue positions. For me, the choice is clear. (I will be voting for Obama).

    [ Parent ]
    And why I look (4.75 / 4) (#90)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:24:55 PM EST
    at the long term health of the democratic party and the issues I care about, which is why I probably won't vote for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    Your choice (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:26:07 PM EST
    I strongly disagree with you.

    My decision is something I came to on my own, but I take very seriously what Hillary said today.

    [ Parent ]

    I strongly disagree with you (5.00 / 4) (#94)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:27:21 PM EST
    and I am glad we have leaders like Hillary who will stay in the party so that when the party learns a lesson, there will be someone like her to pick up the pieces.

    [ Parent ]
    Hold up.... (2.66 / 6) (#96)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:27:41 PM EST
    ....the guy who gave interviews to The Advocate, mentioned the need to treat gays with respect in stump speeches before hostile audiences, attended a pro-gay church...he gay baited his way to victory?

     Wow, San Francisco voters must be very, very dumb, because in America's most gay-friendly city he edged her out.  

     This gay voter, who follows the issue pretty closely, sees at best marginal differences between the two.

    [ Parent ]

    I'd rather not dredge this up again (5.00 / 4) (#105)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:30:33 PM EST
    but he did gay bait his way to victory in South Carolina. The "'Embrace the Change' gospel tour" was not especially pleasant, for a variety of reasons.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually... (1.00 / 1) (#119)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:41:44 PM EST
    ...I didn't really see that as gay baiting, more of a painful first step.  But I respect that others in the gay community disagree.  That episode, and others, have offended me more as an agnostic than as a gay guy, if we want to get into identity politics.

     However, I have heard a lot of attacks on Obama's former church on gay blogs, and that is unwarranted and either exposes ignorance or prejudice.  

    [ Parent ]

    Whether you saw it that way (5.00 / 3) (#121)
    by andgarden on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:43:47 PM EST
    or not, gay baiting it was.

    I think it speaks to my personal commitment to the Democratic party that I'm going to vote for him anyway.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, some in his church did (none / 0) (#127)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:53:44 PM EST
    support ex-gay movements (though links to those movements on the church's website were whitewashed after the McClurkin episode).  

    Though, I agree that painting Obama's church with a broad brush as homophobic is unfair.  

    [ Parent ]

    In that Advocate interview (5.00 / 5) (#108)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:32:36 PM EST
    he gave (after he spent months avoiding the gay press, and a few years after he refused to be photographed with the mayor of San Francisco who bravely performed some gay marriages), he spoke of a gay professor he had as good because he didn't preselytize.  As if all other gay men do, right?  Oh, and let's not forget the insisting that when he took an HIV test, it was with his wife because <wink wink, nudge nudge> he wouldn't want anyone to get the "wong" impression.

    Gay tolerance is a perfect example of why pointing to Obama's website is so useless.  The dog whistles, and in the McClurkin case the abject gay-baiting, tell a lot more about the man than any paper written by his paid gay staffer.

    [ Parent ]

    i had (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by boredmpa on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:01:05 AM EST
    a lot more respect for edwards, who at least admitted where he was coming from and what his perspective was

    [ Parent ]
    Why the "lesser of two evils" argument (5.00 / 4) (#118)
    by Cream City on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:41:03 PM EST
    really doesn't work:  If they're both evil, why vote for either?  Why vote at all?  Yep, that tired old argument that kept me pulling the lever for a less-evil Dem makes it easy to see just what to do this time.  

    Because if I'm to assess their levels of evil by how many times they said and did sexist things, guess who loses that one, sweetie? :-)

    [ Parent ]

    Oh, if only blogs.... (2.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:48:32 PM EST
    ...had been in existence in 1996 or 2000, we could have all sorts of fun debates about the "lesser of two evils," as liberals threatened to abandon ship.

     Actually, the electability argument was always a (slightly more offensive, IMO) similar argument: "Who cares if you don't want Senator Clinton to be the nominee? Only she can win."

     What loyalty the Clinton wing is showing to their longtime supporters with their threats to abandon the party for McCain.  

    [ Parent ]

    The "you're being a bad girl" (5.00 / 3) (#130)
    by Cream City on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:00:19 AM EST
    argument really doesn't work, either.  Do you know how to deal with, as they say, "women of a certain age"?  Let's see which candidate does. . . .

    By the way, the ex always used to say he wanted to spend the weekend with the kids but would go golfing, too.  That's just one of the reasons why he's the ex now.  So that just was the topper today.

    [ Parent ]

    Uhhh.... (3.50 / 2) (#137)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:15:14 AM EST
    ...I never mentioned gender, age or anything that could be reasonably associated with either.

     I'm saying that some are loyal to the Democrats, some are not, and now one set is whining about a stolen primary and a flawed candidate, one set is not (and to my knowledge never has). So we're supposed to embrace an electability argment (read: lowest common denominator) but not a "lesser of two evils" argument?

     You're reading a great deal into my comments...and I really don't know why.  

    [ Parent ]

    When you've been loyal to the Dems (5.00 / 12) (#142)
    by Cream City on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:31:08 AM EST
    for four decades, donating and doorbell-ringing and voting, only to see the Dems lie, cheat, and steal votes to defeat the candidate best on your issues -- for a candidate who goes for those uber-loyal "Dems for a Day" -- get back to me.  Maybe then you'll have the "experience" to frame a better argument.

    [ Parent ]
    did I misunderstand you? (5.00 / 8) (#144)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:35:05 AM EST
    I'm saying that some are loyal to the Democrats, some are not, and now one set is whining about a stolen primary and a flawed candidate, one set is not (and to my knowledge never has).

    I'm hoping you aren't referring to Clinton supporters versus Obama supporters here. Because some Obama supporters started screaming "stolen primary" back in February, and Obama himself based half of his campaign on painting Clinton as a flawed candidate("she'll say or do anything...").

    [ Parent ]

    Nope... (3.00 / 2) (#152)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:44:23 AM EST
    ...I am talking about those who are now threatening, at the end of the primary, to vote for McCain.  

     Believe me, if the roles were reversed and Obama lost, I would not be very happy if Obama's supporter were threatening to vote for McCain.  But this time, my candidate won, and I am in the position of having backed the right horse, so to speak.

     And now, for my reward for supporting candidates I didn't prefer, I get "well now I am voting for the Republican."

     I should have been more selfish, it seems.

    [ Parent ]

    But just stomping on folks (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by eleanora on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:55:16 AM EST
    who disagree with you, calling them stupid, and insisting they adopt your POV because it's obviously the only correct one is mighty ineffective.

    We saw that in the 2004 election when people got mad and dug their heels in on Bush because they were sick of getting told nothing but how stupid they were and how awful he was. What we failed to do was make a good, solid case to enough voters that electing Kerry/Edwards would change people's lives for the better. I'm mad at the Democratic Party right now, but I hate to see us make this mistake again.

    [ Parent ]

    Did I say stupid? (3.00 / 2) (#165)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:07:15 AM EST
    No, I said selfish.  

     Stomping on folks you disagree with? You care to comment on the thrashing anyone with remotely pro-Obama tendencies has received by commentators on this site for months?

     Elitist, egghead, racist, sexist, misogynist, irrelevant, foolish, empty suit, etc.  This isn't just about what has gone on between the candidates, who have been relatively mild. I didn't come here after blogging on dailykos, I came here after blogging on law and independent political blogs.  It wasn't until this site was noted as a Clinton site that I decided to check it out, aftr having visited it (because it was a left-wing LAW blog) in the past.

     Not all Clinton supporters were like this, but this site has been vicious at times.  We've been cornered for months.  And now you're putting words in my mouth? Because I disagree? Yet again.

     As I am certain you feel about Obama, I like Senator Clinton more than I like her die-hard supporters.
     

    [ Parent ]

    Alec82 (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:39:16 AM EST
    There are lessons here for you if you would stop taking everything so personally. Reread Eleanora's post as a primer on what not to do when trying to influence others who disagree with your point of view, instead of as some personal insult to you. Read for the message, because the message was not an insult, the message was about strategy and how to effective talk to people who disagree with you. And part of the message is to really LISTEN to what is said, in order to understand where the person is coming from so that you can be an effective advocate. If all you do is end up yelling at people and calling them names you aren't be effective, you're being counter-productive.

    [ Parent ]
    Tree (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:47:08 AM EST
    There are lessons for you, too.  Part of my message all along has been to really LISTEN to what is said, in order to understand that we are not all Hillary hating maniacs, subtle sexism does not linger behind every post, and McCain is Bush II (Jeralyn and BTD agree, I suspect, with that last point).  To post a statement on this site, given the comments over the last few months, accusing me of "calling them (Clinton supporters) names" would be funny, were it not absurd.  

     Again, see my above reply to you, apply the counterfactual, and be honest.

    [ Parent ]

    I've never accused you (5.00 / 3) (#198)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:13:04 AM EST
    of being a "hillary-hating" maniac, nor has anyone else here, at least not after Jeralyn gets through deleting the offensive posts. I can understand that it might have felt that way to you sometimes. I'm sorry for that.  Again, this sound like you venting. Its perfectly OK to do so, understandable even, but don't try to mix that with attempts to influence people to your position cuz they are rather antagonistic to each other.

     I did apply the counterfactual  honestly. I suspect you won't believe me because I suspect that you think that everyone thinks in exactly the same way you do, so of course they would have exactly the same reaction you did. But not everyone does process information in the same way, nor do they naturally come to the same judgments. Its a hard lesson to learn but I have had to learn it in my personal life and once learned it sticks with you for life.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sorry your having a bad day... (none / 0) (#186)
    by jackyt on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:43:48 AM EST
    Life is full of little disappointments.

    [ Parent ]
    I know, right? (none / 0) (#189)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:51:02 AM EST
    Like losing.  

    [ Parent ]
    Alec, come on. It's been just few days. She (5.00 / 6) (#201)
    by Teresa on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:16:31 AM EST
    gave a wonderful speech today. We need time, not Obama supporters jumping on us to immediately replace a candidate we were very committed to.

    I've been at TL three years, so I know what it is like too. The newer posters here have added a lot to it. They are almost all smart, committed Democrats. These aren't people who take politics lightly so give us a little break. I don't mean don't post, but don't argue and talk about losing. In many ways, we won some things too.

    We are extremely angry at our party right now. You are smart enough to see what Hillary Clinton has had thrown at her and not one undecided party member spoke up to stop it or defend her. We have every right to be angry. They want our money and our vote and they treat us and our candidate like that? This is our own party that did this and some are angry enough about it to leave.

    If you want to be a good advocate for Obama in the future, don't be so aggressive just now. I hated Nader voters, too, but those people had no legitimate reason, in my mind, to hurt our party that way. This time, the party has hurt us.

    [ Parent ]

    Fair Enough. n/t (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:19:02 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Is that it? (none / 0) (#202)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:16:35 AM EST
    Are you now worried about losing?

    [ Parent ]
    You are taking this way too personal (5.00 / 5) (#164)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:58:16 AM EST
    And now, for my reward for supporting candidates I didn't prefer, I get "well now I am voting for the Republican."

    No one is voting to reward or punish you personally. They are voting their preferences and their consciences. This isn't some magical process where you being a "good boy" means that someone else will do what you want them to do. Believe me, life doesn't work that way. You will be repeatedly disappointed if you continue to believe it does.  

    [ Parent ]

    Oh please.... (none / 0) (#166)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:09:27 AM EST
    ...of course not me personally.  But unless they despise Clinton's platform, they're doing it out of spite.  And thumbing their noses as the other parts of the Democratic constituency that refused to nominate their preferred candidate.

     That is, unless they preferred McCain's platform all along.

    [ Parent ]

    Politicians lie about their platforms (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Grace on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:25:11 AM EST
    Remember Bush?  He wasn't into "nation building."  He was going to be the "Uniter."  He promised lots of things while campaigning -- and how many actually happened?  He certainly didn't change the "tone in Washington" because "he was an outsider" (that was another one of his promises).  

    Anyway, they all lie.  You are better off if you just vote for the one you think will honestly be able to accomplish something, anything, that you want and not destroy the country in the process.  

    Personally, I'd be happy if either of these guys could fix the economy but the best candidate to do that was Hillary and she's out of the race.  :(

    [ Parent ]

    You don't have a clue (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:29:23 AM EST
    If you didn't mean you personally then you didn't state your argument correctly. "I should have been more selfish, it seems," is referring to you personally.

    Look, there are people who voted for Clinton who have real and valid reservations about Obama and what kind of President he will be. Many of them have reservations about McCain too. Some of them have decided that their  reservations about Obama are greater than their reservations about McCain and so are at this point planning on voting for him. I'm not one of those, but I can understand and respect their decisions, just as I can understand and respect the decisions of those who choose to vote for Obama.  Just as I hope others can understand and respect where I am at now, which is to vote for neither, either by voting third party or write-in.

     My vote is not intended to thumb my nose at anyone. You seem to think that people are doing what they do just to upset you and those like you.  It isn't, anymore than your vote is intended to thumb your nose at me. Get over your magical thinking on this.

    [ Parent ]

    "I should have been more selfish" (none / 0) (#185)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:41:52 AM EST
    is sarcasm.  Re-read.

     No, your vote is equivalent to Nader voters in 2000...as Clinton supporters might say today, drinking too much kool aid...ouch, that does sting, doesn't it? Particularly in light of what happened after 2000, huh?

     Apply the counterfactual and be honest.  If Senator Clinton won the primary, and Obama supporters were threatening to go to third parties or McCain, what would you be saying? You'd be where we are now.

     Even if you think I am being unfair to you and those who have decided to vote for McCain, why bother responding?  You've made your decision, right? I've made my evaluation of your decision.  You think one thing, I think another.  

    [ Parent ]

    I got the sarcasm (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by tree on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:01:11 AM EST
    You aren't listening. I assume that the reason you bother to post is because you want to change some minds? Or is this all just a personal need of yours to vent?

    Kool-aid drinking doesn't sting at all after the kinds of names I've been called. (Your posts are really sounding more and more like a personal need to vent.)

     No, if the tables are turned, I wouldn't have been where you are now. I would have expected Clinton to do all the heavy lifting to convince Obama supporters to support her. That's what leaders have to do. If I seriously wanted to influence any Obama supporters myself the first thing I would do is listen to what their reservations were, and  I wouldn't use insults or threats as a way to convince them. And if I didn't think I could influence them without insulting them, then I would shut up. And if all I was interested in was insulting them, then I wouldn't  pretend to want to influence them positively.  

    And I don't equate Obama to Gore. Frankly I find the comparison rather insulting, not to me but to Gore. And McCain, bad as he is, is not Bush either.  

    I am responding because this is a forum and I have a right to respond. Why are you posting if you don't want a response? The point I am trying to make is that your style of argument is not influencing anyone in the way that you would like it to. That is the same point others are making here. If you aren't listening then that point can't help you, but its still a very important point to make.

    [ Parent ]

    I think many Obama supporters.... (1.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:13:57 AM EST
    ...have given up on persuading Clinton supporters on this site.  They can't be persuaded, they take personal offense to imagined slights, they disort our posts and our words, etc.

     It isn't venting.  It is pointing out where posters are frankly, not being honest.  

     BTW, this isn't argument, at this point.  It is just disagreement, or fighting.  Argument involves starting principles.  It has become clear, from condescendig language, downrating, and insults, that there are no starting principles for many clinton posters on this site.  

     I'll leave it another Obama supporter to make his case for you, if that is really what you want.  I just want to call out the ridiculous comments.  I want to call out downraters, personal attacks, etc.  I want to call out the vicious.  

     In real time, I'll work on the voters you describe.  Here, after the onslaught of personal attacks and distortions, I'll settle for pointed but fair remarks.  The thin skins deserve it, frankly, because the one-sided attacks from the now self-described "principled" posters are too much to take.  Call it venting if you want to.  Call it whatever you must.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Strawmen (5.00 / 11) (#149)
    by Valhalla on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:41:19 AM EST
    are another argument type that really doesn't work.

    Cream didn't say anything about voting for McCain.  She objected to dragging out something McCain said 8 years ago for the 100th time.

    She asked a question -- why vote for either, and you responded by bringing up another argument, electability which seems to prove her point.  And didn't answer her question.  

    Then you challenged her loyalty.  Which is odd, because she didn't claim loyalty to the Dems.  Loyalty has to be earned, or it's not loyalty, but blind obedience.  Loyalty to something you don't believe in is just wrong.  And whether you agree with it or not, many people have decided recently that the DNC does not deserve their loyalty.  So insulting their loyalty is just ... not going to be very effective.

    [ Parent ]

    you don't want to go there. (3.66 / 3) (#46)
    by MarkL on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:50:04 PM EST
    McCain shows a great deal more class and less sexism  than Obama (which isn't saying much).
    I am so tired of this latest gambit from the Obama people.
    Only one thing matters to me, re Obama, since I absolutely viscerally detest him. That one thing is policy.

    [ Parent ]
    Seriously. (5.00 / 12) (#59)
    by dk on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:58:13 PM EST
    If the argument over the next few months is that "well, at least Obama is less sexist than McCain," I think Obama supporters are not going to be happy with the result.

    [ Parent ]
    What gambit? (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by auboy2007 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:58:59 PM EST
    The fact that he wasn't at the speech?

    I think that was the best course of action.  This was Hillary's moment with her supporters.  She didn't need him there.

    [ Parent ]

    "Policy positions" are talk (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by Upstart Crow on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:42:33 PM EST
    And they change with the wind. I want to see a record of constructive action.


    [ Parent ]
    Policy Positions (2.00 / 0) (#52)
    by chrisblask on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:52:49 PM EST
    Here you go.

    Just a primer, but a good start.

    [ Parent ]

    "Just go to his website"> (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by MarkL on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:36 PM EST
    LOL
    Thanks. Been there, done that.

    [ Parent ]
    Cut the condescension, btw. (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by MarkL on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:56 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Jeez how many times (5.00 / 6) (#68)
    by RalphB on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:05:34 PM EST
    is someone going to point us to that mostly decade old boilerpoint on his website.  Half of that crap was probably recycled from Kerry '04.  

    That's too lame for words.

    And I've read both his fictionalized autobiographies.  There's not a lot of there there either.  Mostly tales of woe from someone with abandonment and identity issues.  Not a good thing in a president IMHO.


    [ Parent ]

    Center-left... (2.66 / 3) (#73)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:10:42 PM EST
    ....positions have been standard for every serious contender since President Clinton.  

     Boilerplate? Fictional autobiographies? You're just on a mission to attack the presumptive Democratic nominee.  Your comments aren't even on topic.  

    [ Parent ]

    His books were mentioned (5.00 / 6) (#78)
    by RalphB on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:15:04 PM EST
    by the same commenter in an earlier comment as a source of information.  If replying isn't on topic, then WTF is.  By the way, if I want your opinion about boilerplate, I'll ask you.

    [ Parent ]
    If I could (none / 0) (#113)
    by suisser on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:37:17 PM EST
    I'd give you a "10" for that last. Hit the nail on the head, didn't ya!

    [ Parent ]
    and you're not upset about the racism memo (none / 0) (#170)
    by suzieg on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:12:56 AM EST
    by Obama's campaign aide in NC?

    [ Parent ]
    I've always been an Abba fan. (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by theprosecutrix on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:17:45 PM EST
    It certainly won't decide my vote one way or the other, but I find it amusing.  

    I love ABBA and can't (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by bjorn on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:27:14 PM EST
    wait for Mama Mia with Meryl Streep, but I guess I am an Obama woman now, so McCain can give it up.
    It is hard enough to settle for second best, I am not going to settle for third best.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't understand, for months I've been coming (5.00 / 3) (#211)
    by suzieg on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:57:26 AM EST
    here and reading how badly, Obama, aides, surrogates, supporters, Dem Party, MSM, MSNBC a la Matthews, Olbermann and Abrams and CNN, treated the Clintons by alleging racism, and overt sexism, etc. and now because she was forced to endorse Obama, we have to basically be joyous and reward him for all of their bad behavior by neatly falling in line instantly like "good little girls" as they always arrogantly predicted that we would.

    By doing so, so radically, doesn't it in fact give him the permission to do it over and over again in the future without any fear of repercussion from our part? In doing so, aren't we in fact condoning them thus allowing them to take our votes for granted by being so complacent as they expected us to be because we had repeatedly come home to roost in the past, thus abdicating our right to stop this abuse?

    I want to teach them all a lesson because Obama's campaign was vile, repugnant and unacceptable. I want to make them sweat and grovel at my feet for months because I'm not as forgiving as you seem to be here. It makes me wonder how seriously invested everyone, who embraced Obama, in a matter of minutes after the speech, were in her candidacy! It reminded me of situations in high school when a choice had to be made between a girlfriend or a boy, and the boy mostly won out! If i learned anything in this race it's that women are not loyal to other women and as Madeleine Albright so rightly quoted: "There is a special place in hell for women who do not help other women" so if you can change your affiliation, in the blink of an eye, you are then complicit by refusing to protest against the abuse that was thrown at her and to force them into making sure it never, ever happens again. Let him crawl for his sins! Why are you so forgiving?

    In the reporting of the democratic convention in Austin, on our news tonight, a good majority of Clinton's hispanic supporters walked out after her speech stating that they were angry that the party and Obama rushed her to make her endorsement and that they were not ready to support him. They kept repeating, too soon, much too soon. They were very angry, as I am. No candidate in presidential history was forced to do this in such a short time frame. Why the double standard? and more importantly why are you not fuming about it? Is it that you enjoy seeing her being steamrolled by him? Where is your outcry?

    Reading that you can so easily change your alliance, shows me a degree of immaturity about how seriously you were invested in her campaign  and what she stood for: universal health care being her main goal, which he still refuses to advocate and fight for but professes to the contrary. As a woman who is fighting breast cancer and who, as of next month, will have great difficulty paying my $22,200 yearly health insurance premiums, deductibles and co-pays, embracing Obama, the only democratic candidate who refuses to fight for mandated health insurance for adults, was a realization that my last chance at getting some kind of relief is next to nil, so I might as well start writing my will. His refusal should have been a disqualifier for running as our nominee. He's shown himself to be a cold, calculating and petty little man who will not be swayed even though he heard multiple stories like mine on the campaign trail and still refuses to consider it simply to make himself more electable to the inds and reps, be damn the dems! It's obscene!!!

    I can not by principle, even consider voting for him. He's put my life in danger as he has in the past when he voted present 7 times on abortion legislation without an exception for the health and life of the woman simply for politica tactics and for his political ambitions as he is clearly doing now. He doesn't give a damn about women's lives! I know he's all air and hypocrisy. Judge him by his actions not by his words.

    I really hope that the million women march takes form - I've already found accomodation in Denver with an ex-work colleague who is kind enough to put me up and is willing to take in more women if need be.

    I'm not ready to make nice! I will fight until the last minute of that convention so that the party knows that I will never again be taken for granted and that I'm against the coup they perpetuated on May 31st. I didn't stay in that party for 40 yrs to be thrown to the curb because of Obama - I will fight for this party because I hate what it has become, and if I lose then I will look elsewhere, but rest assured, I will never vote for the party's selected behind closed doors, not elected candidate Obama! Needless to say, I will no longer post on this site!

    [ Parent ]

    I saw the play in NYC (none / 0) (#32)
    by auboy2007 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:36:22 PM EST
    and I thought the idea of a movie was silly until I finally saw a full trailer.

    Now I'm definitely going to see it.

    [ Parent ]

    Me, too (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:33:36 PM EST
    I've got Abba on my iPod.

    And they've got the perfect song to express how I feel about the DNC.

    [ Parent ]

    love it (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by bjorn on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:37:03 PM EST
    they aren't getting my money!

    [ Parent ]
    And (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Emma on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:38:22 PM EST
    here is what the DNC will be saying to me, and other HRC supporters, for the next five months.

    [ Parent ]
    I love it (4.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:02:03 PM EST
    I'm going to have make up a new playlist - dance music from the '80s.  Even the cheesy stuff is still fun.

    [ Parent ]
    80s music (and disco) (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by echinopsia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:17:52 PM EST
    Is the best walking music in the world. Born to be alive, life after love, etc. Now I've added ABBA. I adore ABBA.

    [ Parent ]
    I've got another ode to the DNC (5.00 / 3) (#102)
    by echinopsia on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:29:57 PM EST
    Oh yes (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:33:58 PM EST
    One of my favorite songs of all time.

    [ Parent ]
    DNC appears to need (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by MichaelGale on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:27:41 PM EST
    money for the convention

    DNC sells convention

    Elected Democratic officials have been calling on corporations -- meeting with Wall Street executives and flying to San Diego, Philadelphia and Las Vegas -- to raise the $40 million the party has budgeted for the convention, in August. In return, these Democratic officials are promising corporate donors "sponsor benefits packages" that include private sessions with federal officeholders and other influential party leaders.


    Oh my,,, (5.00 / 6) (#26)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:34:46 PM EST
    the hypocrisy.

    [ Parent ]
    So much (5.00 / 5) (#29)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:35:31 PM EST
    for not taking money from lobbyists.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (5.00 / 5) (#39)
    by Emma on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:39:53 PM EST
    as long as they're not federally registered lobbyists, it's okay.

    [ Parent ]
    Ah (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:54:39 PM EST
    Well, all righty then.  Good to know the DNC has some principles.  :)

    Lord, it's going to be a long election season.

    [ Parent ]

    Did you see dozens of events (5.00 / 5) (#122)
    by Cream City on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:45:10 PM EST
    already canceled at the convention, for lack of funds?  Lack of all those major donors for Clinton, maybe -- the ones who tried to tell Pelosi and Dean not to do it, not to corrupt the process.  But they did.  Ooops.  Delegates like their parties.  They're so party-building -- so maybe they could hold caucuses, instead, and just stand around for hours?

    [ Parent ]
    wouldn't it be interesting if the majority (5.00 / 3) (#188)
    by DandyTIger on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:50:17 AM EST
    of donors to the DNC historically turned out to be the very voters who have been fired from the party (by Donna). You know, the "so called Democrats" as she called them today -- those that don't support Obama. That would be interesting indeed.

    [ Parent ]
    Has McCain (5.00 / 10) (#22)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:27:56 PM EST
    Taken himself off the ballot in Illinois yet?


    LOL, good one n/t (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by DandyTIger on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:36:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well I'm sure (5.00 / 0) (#48)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:50:48 PM EST
    McCain and Clinton are diametrically opposed to each other on the issue of gaming elections.

    It's what Obama might have in common with McCain on this issue that I find worrisome.


    [ Parent ]

    I like ABBA. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:35:07 PM EST
    It's always nice to be courted.

    I like ABBA too (none / 0) (#51)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:51:51 PM EST
    I don't know what the elites think we should be listening to.


    [ Parent ]
    WillIAm. (none / 0) (#57)
    by masslib on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:56:37 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I don't (none / 0) (#72)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:10:19 PM EST
    even know if that's an individual or a group.

    [ Parent ]
    It's a (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:27:35 PM EST
    Movement.


    [ Parent ]
    Of what? (none / 0) (#100)
    by Nadai on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:29:21 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    What first came to mind (none / 0) (#110)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:33:51 PM EST
    Tones on Tail:

    Your eyes flash bright
    but no longer have fire
    everywhere you turn
    this world is your shadow
    with a pretty face
    you burn so many eyes
    this is the movement of fear
    weird pop
    you can't control
    a smashing guy
    a sack of gold
    teach me to be happy
    teach me control
    this is the movement of fear
    this is the movement of fear
    loved the stare
    that never cracked
    loved the doors
    they were never locked
    loved the fools
    at your finegertips
    this is the movement of fear
    this is the movement of fear
    this is the movement of fear
    this is the movement of fear


    [ Parent ]

    what's funny is McCain's favorite group in NIN (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by DandyTIger on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 10:37:51 PM EST
    which is about as far from ABBA as you can get. I want to see a video of McCain getting down to hard rock. Oh wait, he can't do that, he's left brained.

    Hmmmm.... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Alec82 on Sat Jun 07, 2008 at 11:03:24 PM EST
    His favorite is Reznor? Admittedly, I liked Reznor...when I was a teenager.  Right about the time I was reading various radical books.

     Maybe Senator McCain is a nihilist.  Or maybe he has a soft spot for "Pilgrimage," the best fascist march I have ever heard...

    [ Parent ]

    Uh.. (none / 0) (#148)
    by JustJennifer on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:41:14 AM EST
    I am 40 and I love, love, love NIN.  I have been a fan for 20 years.  :)  I have seen Trent 12 times... next month I will see him for the 13th time.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh I still like... (none / 0) (#158)
    by Alec82 on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 12:49:07 AM EST
    ...his earlier work, but nothing post-Fragile.  

     People have many, many reasons for liking or disliking him, as with any artist, but he appealed to us 90s teenage males for a reason....which helps explain why Senator McCain would use him as a prop.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah I heard.. (none / 0) (#178)
    by JustJennifer on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 01:30:28 AM EST
    the McCain thing before.  I knew there was no way he was serious.  Wasn't he joking?  I can't imagine he would pick an artist who is pretty