Look, people - most of you are convinced Obama will win the nomination anyway, right? If so, then what effect does Hillary-bashing have? Does it help Obama win the war of impressons among the undecideds? Do your actions help him look responsible, thoughtful, presidential? Do you understand that he inevitably will be judged in part by his supporters?
Some of you think she has a shot at it still - if so, then what good does bashing her do? Doesn’t it just do the Republicans’ work for them, letting them say that even Democrats hate her, etc.? If you think a McCain presidency would be superior to a Clinton one, then fine. But do you really?
Or is the sheer fun of a good bash more important to you than responsible citizenship? That’s what it seems - and that’s the kind of thing Obama promises to *end * in Washington. Do you see any inconsistency in that at all?
I would like to have an honest, principled person in the White House who will make intelligent decisions based on what is best for the country. Positions on the issues are less relevant than that. Based on that criteria, my ranking of the candidates is Obama, McCain, Hillary.
If Hillary wins I will vote for McCain without even thinking twice. And I think she has a significant chance of winning.
(…helpfully pulls a chair into the appropriate position as Elvis clutches his pearls and swoons…)
Steady up, this is a political campaign, the only time they are conducted in polite civility is when nobody gives a rat’s. Hear any shit like this when people campaign for the County Board of Commissioners? Well, in Texas, maybe…
There are a number of serious drawbacks to democracy, and this is one of them. Dopers are the smartest, hippest etc. and even we, with all our Olympian detachment, are not immune to the passions.
And you know what? I think that’s a good thing, its like a fever that kills an infection, the infection of apathy that has poisoned our governance for so very, very long. Rancor is a puny price to pay, calm civility is too small a blessing at the price of indifferance.
If you give a shit, sooner or later, someones going to call you names. Wear your cup, and try not to snicker when they break a toe.
:dubious: When have I? I honestly can’t remember when I’ve demonized people who vote for Hillary. Post a cite.
Spare me. Anybody who isn’t voting for a candidate that they otherwise agree with because some of their supporters are unappealing is too fucking stupid to vote. Period.
So you really think we’re going to see McCain campaign ads featuring myself and Shayna do you? That’s adorable. Never mind that Hillary herself (not staffers, not anonymous supporters on teh interwebs, Hillary Clinton) has already made a nice little campaign ad for McCain all by her lonesome.
Maybe not superior, but preferable at least.
1)We still haven’t defined bash yet and how that definition differs from responsible citizenship. Are we talking calling Hillary names or simply pointing out why we won’t vote for her/find her to be not quite the right candidate for us?
Nope. Just because we like someone as a candidate does not mean we have to follow their example to the letter. You still haven’t gotten that yet.
I think I speak for most people who’ve been following these threads when I say stick a fried peanut butter and banana sandwhich up your cry hole, you degenerate sawed off puppy fucker. All you’ve offered is whining to the threads, completely ignoring all the shit piled against you, weaseling out of reality with some fucked up Hillary filtered sun glasses. We can’t help it if the facts have an anti-Hillary bias, they are the facts, and your sniveling poppy-cock demeanor makes all but the Luddites annoyed, and that’s only because they are distracted by their loud pantaloons. Your bait and retreat, thread shitting tactics only force people away from Hillary more, while you’re vile, contemptible nature makes even the most apathetic chap want to paint velvet portraits of Benedict Arnold.
Thanks for providing yet another example, if any were needed, which it actually weren’t.
HW, when you’re interested in actually responding to anything that *has * been said here, be sure to let us know.
And the beat goes on …
It is *because * of our smartness and our hipness that we should be able to recognize and control those feelings. Otherwise what is the reason to believe that we’re any better than those we disdain for being controlled by their own? We *do * have to become better than we are.
If we, as Dopers or as citizens or as anything else, want anybody to give our views any respect, they first have to be *worthy * of respect. One of the true joys of this board is the opportunity it presents to actually have our views judged against those very standards of smartness and hipness, and by so doing become smarter and hipper. There are, unfortunately, those who think smartness and hipness are demonstrated by how well they can articulate the passions you mention, without regard for their factuality or reasoning. But that is not what we are are should be about, hmmm?
Once again you’ve made a claim and refused to back it up preferring to avoid it altogether by making it seem as if you are taking the intellectual high ground. It’s like you’re not content to be merely offensively stupid, you have to be boring and repetitive as well.
Honestly, I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of the OP. Railing against Clinton in an emotional way gives her supporters an out - they can wave away legitimate criticism as “bashing,” or focus their conversation on the more vitriolic attacks. For the undecided observer, this draws attention away from the essentially empty nature of much of the support for her.
Elvis, here in this thread and elsewhere, serves as the perfect example. A few days ago, Shayna started a thread. She noted that Clinton and her supporters describe Clinton’s putatively superior experience and accomplishments as one of her advantages over Obama. She asked Clinton supporters to specify some of these accomplishments. Now, Shayna’s allegiances are not particularly hidden, but I have no reason to suspect her of debating in bad faith; I think if there was an answer, she would have considered it reasonably.
Now that was an unemotional, non-“bashing” approach to the discussion. And what did it accomplish? I’d say a lot. Elvis was absolutely unable to come up with an answer. In fact, not a single person who favors Clinton over Obama could offer a substantive answer to the question. There were a few feeble attempts at dismissing the question as “bashing,” but since it was obviously not, those attempts were transparent for what they were. And so an undecided voter, reading that thread, would have come away with: there is no answer to Shayna’s question; Hilary Clinton’s accomplishments are no more impressive than Barack Obama’s.
But the more intense and vitriolic attacks on Clinton don’t accomplish the same thing. They allow folks like Elvis to lie back and play martyr. Not useful.
As for Hilary herself, I can’t hate her or even dislike her. She’s a decent politician and I don’t think she’s a bad person - just a very competitive person who is losing right now and has never experienced losing on this particular scale. I feel for her, actually; against a less impressive opponent she’d very likely have ended up as both nominee and president. Now she is unlikely to be the former and will certainly never be the latter. On a purely human level, that has to be incredibly frustrating, and makes her constant defensive anger understandable and forgivable.
Not really pertinent to the issue at hand Elvis, but something elucidator said above indicated you were a guy whereas I’d recently come to think that you are a woman. So just to avoid the clumsy he/she construct when talking with or about you, would you mind setting us straight in this regard?
Elvis, use your head. Sure, you’re not going to convince Shayna to vote for Clinton. But you do know that other people besides Shayna read these political threads, right?
Contrast to some of the global warming threads. You think jshore expects to convince whatisname? No, he’s not trying to convince whatisname, he’s trying to demonstrate to everyone reading that whatisname’s arguments are bunk.
Not that it matters in terms of this discussion, or of many others, but I’m a man, with the typical family/mortgage/cars etc. accoutrements of middle age.
The challenge for some good faith is still out there, ya know. Phlosphr is a good example for you to follow in that regard. Sheesh, isn’t the Two Minutes Hate for today over yet?
Sure, but not many with an actual interest are still reading that many pages into a hatefest. Nor am I interested in being more of a target than I already am just for pointing out that that’s all it is.
I don’t even go into those myself. But I’ll take your word for it.
One of the nice things about this primary is that, for a change, I don’t have to be embarassed to be on the same side of an issue as ElvisL1ves. The feeling of relief is as immense as it will no doubt be shortlived, as I imagine that whoever gets the nomination will end up getting both of our support. I can only hope that, wether it is Clinton or Obama who goes up against McCain, Elvis will for once have the sense to keep quiet and not damage our candidate’s chances of victory with his customary vacuous babblings.
