Your turn.
Comments closed.
Make a new account
I don't think that falls under the heading of "unity".
Seriously, with friends like these, Obama has no need of swiftboaters. [ Parent ]
In case anyone's wondering . . . POPT does work with people too, lol!~ [ Parent ]
link [ Parent ]
BTD, you really live up to your screen name. (And the loveable part, I agree with that too!)
Thanks for everything you do here.
There is a comment in another post about an Obama supporter saying "I heard him speak" as his reason to support BO.
If that's all it takes...hasn't all of America already "heard him speak"?
And didn't half of Dems want someone else?
And if he really is/was so inspirational, why didn't he blow HRC out of the water with voters after Super Tuesday in February?
And why did he only win via Super Delegates?
And why - seriously - isn't he ahead of McCain by 25 points in the polls right now? I mean, these are his glory days...but the "old man"/Bush II is right there with him?
I have my answers to these questions? What about some answers by a BO supporter or two?
Don't these facts actually make you (even) slightly nervous?
Crickets.
Hard kwestins, I guess. Troubling that we're not getting answers. [ Parent ]
I guess they wanted to believe hope/change was enough.
I outgrew those hopes in 2000 when a lying rich guy who couldn't make sense 'won' over an honorable progressive who was really smart.
Do people not pay attention? [ Parent ]
The same guy who's brilliant campaign is based on not leaving a paper trail and avoiding anything "controversial" by voting Present -- cause yes or no might (:: eek eek ::) sully the suit later?
He's brave in his imagination, a downright champion in his hypothetical scenarios and a veritable lion of the civil rights movement in his rhetoric.
But he's a chickensh!t coward in standing up against injustice when it matters most: when it's happening right under his nose.
CLUE: denounce the bigotry when it's happening, Senator Obama, don't look the other way or USE it to score personal points when a worthy colleague and campaign rival is besieged with a historically unprecedented onslaught of bigotry. (My, isn't the b!tch divisive!) [ Parent ]
Clinton is not able to deliver 100% of her supporters to Obama any more than Obama is able to tell his supporters what to say (or not say) about Clinton. [ Parent ]
But after what I've seen the past six months, oh yea, I believe without a doubt there's some people there on the dole. Can't name names - won't name names - but yea, I believe it.
But I also think there are Republican operatives there, and it disgusts me even more that dKossians fell right into their trap(s).
Not too bright. And very destructive. [ Parent ]
Go ahead. I really want an answer. [ Parent ]
Glad to say that I'm a good old fashioned liberal and these positions don't appeal to me at all. [ Parent ]
I don't actually think all of America has heard him speak, no. I think a sizable percentage frankly hasn't been paying that much attention to this race, yet. It sometimes seems unthinkable to me because I've been following this race for almost 18 months, but we still have six months to go.
Why didn't he blow out Clinton seems obvious to me. She was an incredibly popular, formidible, talented and inspirational figure. She is, by all measures, an excellent candidate for President. The fact that he managed to edge her out at all was an amazing feat. But to turn it around. In six months, he managed to go from tied for a distant second with John Edwards to beating one of the most formidable candidates imaginable.
Yes, half of democrats wanted someone else. But had Clinton won, her detractors would be able to say the same thing. Its a problem we would have had to face either way.
These by the way are not the Glory Days. He's just come out of the toughest bitterest and most divisive primary we've seen in a generation. Whereas John McCain has literally coasted for three months.if anyone has in their glory days its him. And yet, the best he can do right now is tie Obama? If Obama can manage to unify the party (and I grant, that's a big if) he'll crush McCain. [ Parent ]
But thanks for answering. [ Parent ]
McCain's been within 3 point of Obama (when he hasn't been ahead) for a while now. Last night Fox was bloviating over the most recent Rasmussen poll, which shows Obama 4 points ahead. If that's the bump - 1 pont -- there's trouble ahead.
I think Obama maxed out his appeal in February and March, and I just don't see anything he could do, aside from putting Clinton on the ticket, that would produce a big swing either way.
And, if she's not on the ticket, I'm starting to wonder about the convention bump too. I almost think a floor fight would have been better for the Party, it would attract more eyeballs than a Unity Snoozefest.
(disclaimer: while I agree with BTD that Clinton on the ticket is Obama's only hope, I don't think she should accept, what a waste of her talents). [ Parent ]
But only a few would be willing to make their true feelings known to pollsters and the public.
We'll only know what chance Obama has of becoming President when every ballot is counted after Nov. 4. (if he's at the top of ticket -- yes, I'm still holding out hope for the best) [ Parent ]
One of Obama's assets is his speaking ability. Another strength is what he has to say. He won many supporters in his speech about Reverend Wright.
Why did he not blow Clinton away? Why is McCain as close as he is? For one thing, both seem to be great candidates (and Clinton doesn't just seem).
But Obama has negatives:
(I don't want to address these - although they may be problems in the GE: Reverend Wright. A penchant for saying true but impolitic things -- bittergate. His skin color. His gender (a factor with some Clinton supporters). His name.)
But take a look at the issues at the top of your list. And why, therefore are you a BO supporter?
(This question comes from someone who truly believes that we need someone great as our next POTUS to make up for 8 years under one of the stupiest human beings in my lifetime). [ Parent ]
The continual assertion that Obama's Bittergate statements were true.
They weren't.
And it wasn't simply impolitic, it was the worst form of elitism. It showed Obama was unable to project himself into the lives of the people he was describing. The group was simply a "they" to be derided.
Given his history, it's shocking Obama would be able to do this. And it shows both a lack of compassion and intellectual rigor. [ Parent ]
You're asking why didn't Obama blow out HRC? You should actually be asking why Obama was able to beat HRC at all. Haven't you read the post mortems? This is one of the biggest upsets in history.
Obama got superdelegate support after he proved his viability as a candidate and as a money raiser. Also, Hillary's attacks and tactics turned off a great many superdelegates. Some of her more radical supporters didn't help either. While Hillary did not encourage these people, I think the association was nevertheless made between Hillary's tone and the stridency of some of her supporters.
By the way, 90% of Hillary's supporters weren't interested in policy, imo. They liked her for intangible reasons, just like the person who embraced Obama after hearing him speak. You can wade through the comments here and other pro-Hillary sites; rarely will posters cite policy as the reason for supporting Hillary. [ Parent ]
90% of Hillary's supporters weren't interested in policy, imo
Your opinion would be wrong, like the rest of your little screed. [ Parent ]
This is a sincere question for Obama supporters: What is the difference between Bill Clinton's "triangulation" (bad) and Obama's "postpartisanship" (good)?
To me, they both sound like two sides of the same coin--with the difference that Clinton was operating in a political (massive GOP majorities in Congress) and ideological (no post-Bush implosion, no blogoshphere/media critique) environment far less hospitable to the enactment of a progressive agenda.
Truly, this is a serious question, because it really disturbs me that his own supporters (those who I've spoken to so far) cannot tell me exactly what their candidate is talking about on this score.
Indeed...both are triangulation in that they are strategies used by a "candidate [who is] presenting his or her ideology as being 'above' and 'between' the left and right sides of the political spectrum."
There's prolly a Greek term for it, but my Rhetoric dictionary is in box somewhere. [ Parent ]
Maybe...they don't have any answers or don't like the answers?
ANOTHER SERIOUS QUESTION: If Hillary manages to get true UHC through Congress will a "president" Obama sign it? [ Parent ]
Plus, if it's her bill, then the media will be all over it, saying that he's a hen-pecked husband if he caves in to her on it. It would be a capitulation to HER. He will not sign it.
But I think his allies in the Senate will recognize this and not want to cause trouble in his first year and won't let it pass. After the first year, who knows?
As always, this is just my opinion. [ Parent ]
Who's he beholding to? [ Parent ]
With regard to political context, triangulation was forced upon Clinton because he had to deal with a Republican controlled Congress for his last six years during a time when conservatism was ascendant.
Obama, on the other hand, seeks to establish an era of "postpartisanship" only after establishing a strong Democratic majority in Congress during an era of progressive ascendency. Due to his background as an organizer, Obama understands that winning an election isn't enough -- progressives must also build a long-lasting movement to govern successfully. This requires messaging that moves the political debate back to the center-left, away from the extreme right wing values that were mainstreamed by Bush II in the wake of 9/11.
When backed up by a strong grassroots movement, "postpartisanship" becomes a cudgel to threaten vulnerable Republicans in the Congress. They must move beyond right-wing partisanship and adopt mainstream progressive positions on issues like health care, global warming, etc or face annilation in the next election. And because this is about movement building and not just winning a presidential election, the electoral college isn't the only target. One key to building this movement is Dean's 50 state strategy and Obama's massive 50 state voter registration campaign to ensure that even red state legislators are not beyond the threat of a rising progressive tide in their states/districts.
In short, Clinton was forced to triangulate from a position of political weakness. Obama seeks an era of postpartisanship that is backed up with progressive political strength. It is a new day. [ Parent ]
To me this just seems like a code / rationalization for "we can compromise our principles, so long as we win"?
moves the political debate back to the center-left, away from the extreme right wing values
Sounds not that dissimilar to triangulation to me. After all, anything that happens in 2008 is surely bound to be post everything that happened in 2004.
If you believe that such ideological issues can be put on a Cartesian plane and these were like points A-B-C.. the issue is not how much you move from C to B (voters who have given Dems the majority in Congress already KNOW that's happened), but how much ground Obama is prepared to concede in going from A to B. No Obama supporter thus far has been able to clearly articulate this IMHO -- because I suspect they (and the MSM) have not asked their candidate concrete questions and gotten answers they are truly comfortable with.
Speaking of sustenance -- I'd rather not see the present laziness and ineffectiveness in Congress to deal with the war in Iraq, or real-issues that affect Americans, be sustained by a long-lasting movement.
And another point -- if post-partisanship comes to mean relaxing our system of checks and balances.. (which I see a high risk of given Obama's inexperience) I'm not sure I like that formulation either, given all the relaxation that has already gone on under Bush under the guise of fighting the war on terror.
JMO. [ Parent ]
When backed up by a strong grassroots movement, "postpartisanship" becomes a cudgel to threaten vulnerable Republicans in the Congress. They must move beyond right-wing partisanship and adopt mainstream progressive positions on issues like health care, global warming, etc or face annilation in the next election.
In other words, "post-partisanship" is an example of "just words". Its a stick to beat Republicans with. Rather like the "movement" and "unity" are sticks used to beat recalcitrant Dems.
This is feeling more and more like a Glorious Cultural Revolution. [ Parent ]
Talk of "postpartisanship" makes (1.) nervous while appealing to (2.) The more Obama has to explain postpartisanship to make you comfortable the less value it will have in securing the votes of Independents.
You obviously have to evaluate everything that Obama is both doing and saying to determine if he merits your support. But I'm confident that you are not so naive as to expect a candidate to fully explain his agenda in a manner that limits his appeal to a broader group of voters. [ Parent ]
And yes if Congress sends President Obama a UHC bill he'd sign it. President McCain wouldn't. And no, that's not me trying to scare people into voting for Obama that's just reality. [ Parent ]
Ahh, so great. The next generation now is responsible. I am off the hook.
The next generation now is responsible. I am off the hook.
snicker.
I'm jealous of your weather though.
The weather here will be ugly (hot). I've just realized that was why I felt so bad yesterday. I've got to get the AC set up before the Jewish holiday tonight... [ Parent ]
However, I draw the line at country music. It's a personal failing. I just can't reconcile cornpone and hip. (It was just as hard in the 60s when hip JFK chose cornpone LBJ as a running mate...) [ Parent ]
That is as far as I have ventured by myself. Sorta scared to go further. As a black man my cred with be severely hurt by having a Garth Brook CD :). [ Parent ]
Actually, I get into all kinds of music, I am not a very, "never like that". I can go from Tammy Wynette, to Digable Planets, to Mario Lanza, to Vivaldi, to Glass. Music is one thing I am not partisan on. Ok, I don't like a few things: 1. uber punk stuff that was just a cacophony . 2. What my kids call Emo. This new kind of rock where it's supposed to be "about deep feelings" and all it is , is way too many words to make a good song, but the brat singing has to show something for all the years in private schools and colleges. You know the lyrics: "that I am upper class privileged white kid from the suburbs and I am hurting". [ Parent ]
"I would die and slit my wrist before I'd vote for Obama," said a Silver Spring woman in the Clinton volunteers section who gave her name only as Edith. She wore a sign pinned to the back of her Hillary T-shirt proposing: "Remember in November: vote present."
Wonder how many other women feel that way. I have a niggling feeling it's a lot.
I am tickled by the notion that only women Clinton supporters would be unwilling to vote for BO. There are lots of men too, and lets not lose sight of the few million who voted for Edwards, Richardson et. al. A good number I'm sure -- women and men -- will not automatically fall in line behind Obama just because their first pick endorsed him. [ Parent ]
Of course, sometimes a few good men is all we get -- in politics, in the workplace, in life. But then, that's all that a good woman needs at her side.:-) [ Parent ]
Make sure you go sign the DSCC petition and tell them what you think, what you value, and who you will vote for!
Here is what I sent:
You want my congratulations?
I can't congratulate someone who did not earn the victory. This is how Bush "won" the presidency, twice, with no Democratic leader standing up for the truth. You rolled over then, but I will not roll over for you.
If you want my vote, you'll need to earn it.
Obama and the DNC have a lot to apologize for and a big hole to dig themselves out of. I need to hear explicit apologies for the misogyny, for the smears, for the lies, for the obscene gestures by Obama(It is on tape, don't deny it along with your references to sexist rappers.), for the bitter talk by Michelle Obama(the interview is on tape, don't deny it. I guess I'll just have to "think about it" like Michelle).
Smearing my candidate and myself by calling us racists doesn't make me want to vote for you. Won't get money for the DNC. Doesn't keep me in your party. And let me be clear about this. The Democrats left me, I didn't leave the party.
I was a lifelong Democrat, but I am re-registering as an independent. You have been clear in your messaging that women are not valued. Women are not accomplished, women do not count. Don't blame Hillary, this is all on you. Obama, the DNC, Howard Dean, Donna Brazile.
Obama's behavior has been immature and similar to the frat-boy currently occupying the oval office. It is conduct unbecoming to someone aspiring to the presidency. I don't like it in Bush, I don't like it in Obama. I won't accept it and most certainly I won't vote for it.
Howard Dean has ignored the sexism and misogyny in the media and from his candidate. By the sin of omission he has personally embraced and furthered the misogyny. I wrote and called him repeatedly, asking him to stand up against it and all I got was silence. Donna Brazile has been a huge disappointment to me as has Claire McCaskill. Women may choose to support a male candidate, I've got no problem with that, but they do us all a disservices when they propagate lies and smears about a woman candidate, especially when she is a fellow Dem.
Dean's and McCaskill's comments now are late and lacking. Empty because it is long past the time when they could have helped the situation. Along with Obama's race baiting (remember he admitted he was responsible for the memo on a publicly televised debate) you have created the division you now fear. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Unity is a two-way street. You don't get to batter my worth day in and day out and then tell me I have to to give you my vote. That dog don't hunt. I have an education, a brain, and I have money. I am the creative class Obama thinks he owns. I support those that support me.
This is what crystallized my resolve.
"No self respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her self." - Susan B. Anthony, 1872
Words of wisdom. Words of a woman who knew the score long ago. Words that still ring true today. Words to live by.
You are not entitled to my vote any longer, or my money. I will consider voting for a candidate that demonstrates they have the experience and accomplishments to get things done. Someone who cares about the issues I care about and proves to me he or she will work tirelessly to deliver the results to me.
Voting present does not show me Obama vigorously supports women's issues, I have no confidence in his votes or voice. Don't tell me McCain is pro-life. At least I know where he stands; I have no clue what Obama "hopes" for or what he will "change". I have seen no evidence he can change anything except increase the lack of civility in the campaign and malign other Democratic candidates.
The only "Change" I see is a "Democrat" stealing votes that he didn't earn. You stole 600,000 votes from Michigan Democrats that did not want you. The DNC gamed the primaries by refusing to do the right thing by Florida and Michigan (BTW, good luck with them in the General Election). You can scream that Obama has more delegates until you are blue in the face, if you counted all the votes, Hillary would have more delegates in addition to already having more actual votes. Your actions disenfranchised 18 MILLION Democratic voters. 18 MILLION. More than anyone else in the history of presidential primaries.
Your "rules" won't matter in the General Election. Only the electoral college map counts there and you obviously haven't looked at it. You didn't follow your "rules" anyway. Some of us actually read the rulebook. We know where you lied and what you did. We know that others received waivers for the same actions that Florida and Michigan took. We know it was within your control to do the right thing and incredibly short-sighted to do what you did. We understand fair reflection and how you ignored the rule requiring both Fair Reflection and PUBLIC meetings and decisions rather than back room antics. Either follow the rules or don't. But if you don't, please to try and take the moral high ground. Obama made a political decision to take his name off the Michigan ballot because he wouldn't win there. He isn't entitle to any votes. He also violated YOUR rules by holding a press event in Florida AND running ads on TV in Florida, by your RULES he is not entitled to ANY votes in Florida. Those chickens will come home to roost in the general.
I'm not unreasonable, but I'm not stupid. Don't lie to me and think I won't call bulls**t on you.
So if you want me to consider you for my vote in any election (senate, house, presidential, school board, whatever):
Tell what is in it for me. After all, you are applying to work for me. I have a right to know what you will do in the job, why you think you can accomplish your stated goals, and how I know you will follow through on your promises.
Tell me how you are going to get me TRULY UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. Not the watered down proposal Obama has. Talk about selling out to the healthcare lobbyists! How will you cover every one and achieve cost savings by spreading the risk across all. I don't need more "wins" that feed the pharmaceutical industry with nonnegotiation clauses.
Tell me how I can trust that you will support issues that are important to women, I need facts and accomplishments not pretty words.
Tell me how you will turn the economy around, specifically. Tell what actions you will take to get new jobs.
Tell me how you will fix the educational system. Both K-12 and getting more people into college without horrendous loans. What about a plan for retraining laid off workers. Let's not just talk about college for HS students, lets talk about getting older people and current workers back to college or into college for the first time. How do we fund that? They will be in the work force for a long time, they need skills.
Tell me how you will insure my retirement. I've paid into Social Security and Medicare all my life. I want my benefits fully funded. Don't tell me you will cut them. If you do, give me my money back so I can retire when the time comes. Get me Health care so I don't have to worry about what happens to me then, or choose between eating catfood and buying medicine.
Tell me how you will nominate for the Supreme Court. How many women will you nominate or confirm? We are more than half the population! Will they be pro choice and pro constitution? How can I be sure you will follow through on your promises?
How will you restore the constitution? How will you hold the telcos responsible for their wiretapping? They knew it was illegal, voting for their immunity will not earn my vote, quite the opposite.
Tell me how you will support our veterans, past and present. How will you protect my parent's benefits EARNED in the Vietnam war? How will you provide for returning soldier's needs without taking away from my parents? The VA is already broken, as is the military, how exactly will you fix this?
Tell me about the role of women in your administration and in your appointments - will they approximate the percentage of women in the country? Or how about going with the percentage of women that USED to make up the Democratic party? That would help, but you really need to apologize without equivocating. You were wrong and you need to own up to it, then start working hard to make it right.
I don't know what I will do in the GE at this point. Hillary has been extremely gracious to Obama, but still they bash her and say she hasn't done enough. Of course she has tried not to damage him throughout the campaign, regardless of what he and his supporters have said. (BTW, deal with your whiney obnoxious supporters. They have lost you almost as many votes as you have driven away yourself).
I value Hillary's experience, persistence, courage, and tireless campaigning. I haven't seen those qualities in Obama. I have been working in Biotech and High Tech since I graduated from college. I look at this as a hiring decision. When I hire someone for a job, I look at what they have accomplished, not what they say they can do. I look at what they have actually done and the skills those accomplishments demonstrate. I don't see much from Obama. He may complain that Hillary doesn't respect his accomplishments, but he should be more worried about the fact that no one knows what they are. His supporters can't articulate them, he doesn't talk about them, and his resume is very thin.
Obama can point to his speech on Iraq all he wants, but it is just words. At this point I don't even know whose words they are, Deval Patrick's? Axelrod's? Some anonymous speechwriter? I didn't see any actions to back it up. He never stuck his neck out when it counted or when there was any risk. Seems like his goal is just winning and cashing in, not working for me. Prove to me I'm wrong. And apologize for your wrongs.
To the Senate Democratic Caucus. I'll be looking at how you have acted and voted also. Those who dissed Hillary and made sexist remarks or stood by and said nothing don't demonstrate what I need to see in a candidate.
My money and votes will go to those with a clear strong voice on the values that used to be central to the Democratic Party I joined long ago. My money and votes will go to those who strongly and openly support women: their issues, their advancement, and their opportunities.
Visible strong actions are what I'm looking for, pretty words won't get the job done and won't get you hired. I've been in the real world long enough to know what to look for. Pretty words, immature actions, and lack of accomplishments aren't a recipe for success. Prove I'm wrong about you and you could get my vote.
Take me and my 18 million friends for granted and you will lose miserably.
And you also better stop slamming Hillary. No one else has ever been hounded to drop out of the primary, certainly no one who had more popular votes than the other candidate. Kennedy, Edwards, Bradley... look at history.
Hillary has been more than fair. The 18 Million Hillary supporters will not go to Obama if he doesn't earn them. Stop saying this is Hillary's job. Obama needs to step up and take responsibility for his actions and EARN something. He won't game us like he did the system. He won't bully us like he did in the Caucuses. (and BTW, get rid of the caucuses. Not democratic. not fair. not just).
If Obama loses, he will only have himself to blame. His nomination is illegitimate now. He took what didn't belong to him because he was desperate to win at all costs. He wanted it badly and he got it badly. Stop digging the hole and take responsibility for it. Stop blaming Hillary and her supporters. Be an adult for a change. Maturity in a president would be a nice change.
I'm not bitter and I don't cling to guns and religion. I am intelligent and a do cling to my vote. It is my right. I don't owe you anything, you work for me. Support me and I will support you,
So get busy if you want my vote. You don't get it automatically. You don't get it for nothing. Tell me what is in it for me. Show me what you have done for me in the past and tell me how you will do what you say you will do for me. Prove to me I should believe you.
To summarize, let me give you the take home message again. Get a tattoo if you need to, but remember it if you want 18 Million votes.
This Tuesday, the 89th anniversary of the first states' ratifications (first Wisconsin, then Illinois, although it typically screwed up so had to do a do-over, and then -- yes -- Michigan, the state where Dems even disenfranchise men now) of the 19th Amendment. [ Parent ]
I'm gonna pack some purple/yellow ensemble, myself...(not a delegate, just going for the fireworks) [ Parent ]