If anyone does not think there is a split among democrats please venture into the blogosphere or ANY news agencies website and look at the comments to ANY article regarding Clinton and Obama. The hate and vitriol among supposed same party people is palpable.
Obviously we have seen this throughout the primary season: split, upon split, upon split with Obama coming out on top overall. I truly don’t know if it is deep seeded racism, the fact that he is young, or the simple fact that he has beaten a Clinton that makes the true hate-mongers come out in droves to comment on these stories.
Clinton get’s her due as well [in spades] - people coming out of the woodwork calling her every name in the book - I wonder if it is because she is a woman, a Clinton, her manner of speak, I don’t know.
But one thing is abundantly clear, the dems are split, and we need to come together and truly heal this party so we can beat McCain in the fall.
What are the biggest reasons the dems are split? If Clinton and Obama’s plateform is so similar why are we seeing such vitriol for each candidate? Is it because each Candidate is a historical one? Is it the party itself showing us that it is permanently fractured and it’s very infrastructure is contaminated?
The “split” we’re seeing right now is about personality rather than policy. The Clinton supporters and Obama supporters may disagree on priorities or branding, but when it comes down to it they want similar things for the country. So once this thing gets definitively settled, a lot of that split is going to disappear.
A lot of people say they’ll vote for McCain if one candidate or the other gets elected, but I don’t buy it. Some of them will, and others will stay home, but most of them will come around when they hear more of what Obama and McCain have to say and the real differences become clear.
It was only a couple of months ago when a lot of the GOP rank and file were going on about how they couldn’t support McCain, but since he locked up the nomination you don’t hear so much of that.
In terms of ideology and policy positions, there’s really very little difference between Obama and Clinton. Obama gets my vote mainly because he has never had anything to do with the DLC, but I’m not sure how much can safely be inferred from that.
Both are strongly qualified for the position and similar in proposed policies. Because of that, you’ll see emotion and subconsciously psychological choices being made to differentiate the two. It seems that the two candidates have attributes the make their supporters/detractors take extremely partisan sides.
Many, not all, supporters of Hillary think it’s a woman’s turn and believe that strongly. The exact same can be said of Obama’s supporters – it’s time to support a black for president. Go a little deeper into that and the dichotomy becomes even more pronounced. I’m not talking about racism here but the clearcut choices on the table when talking about the dichotomy offered in making a choice between a white woman or a black man can bring out strong and deeply-held personal preferences. I’d also like to note that I don’t think every supporter of Hillary is racist or is doing it for feminist reasons nor do I think racist or misogynist when I think of every Obama’s supporter.
Racism. While I mentioned the black/white dichotomy above, I think the people who are decided to not vote for one candidate or the other can hold some racial beliefs, hesitations and misgivings. While this can be said of black voters as well as white, it is most pronounced by what was only touched on in West Virginia and Hillary’s hardworking, white voters comments. I must say, in stating this, I’m not saying that those for whom race will be still a factor in regards to whom they will not vote are died-in-the-wool, wearing-white-hoods racists – far from it – but we would be naive to believe that, just because Obama has done as well as he has, there aren’t those who will still hold his race against him when it’s time for the rubber to meet the road.
Let me conclude by saying these are only a couple of factors that I believe are relevant to the OP. Let me also say, as skeptical as I am about our inability to really talk about the race elephant that’s still in the room, I am truly proud (not for the first time!) to be alive in the United States at this time in history. We’ve come a long way and it’s the voters who are ready to make that next step in our progress who I’m counting on to elect Obama in November.
People post all sorts of stupid things on the internet. Particularly in the middle of a heated contest, it’s easy to let short-term emotions override long-term reason. Once the primary season is well and truly over, the emotions will die down and Clinton’s supporters will get in line behind Obama.
The same basic sequence of events has happened many times before. It even happened in the Republican primary season earlier this year. Conservatives were ranting and raving about how they’d rather have their intestines pulled out by a yak than vote for McCain, but that was only while the election was still contested. Once McCain won, those same people quickly began working with him.
And since the Democrats are the more logical party while the Republicans are the more emotional, the transition should take place even quicker with the Democrats.
I don’t like Hillary, and don’t much care for her politics within the context of the Dems. I like her politics much more than just about any Pubbie, but this whole movement to make the Dems into Republican Lite chaps my hide. The “Me, Too!” Party. Fuck that shit. This cabal of pussilanimous pussyfooters is centered on the Dem leadership, and Hillary is their baby. Feh!
Don’t start from the compromise position, you’ll only end up giving up ground you need not surrender without a fight. Propose left, and compromise to the center, as need be.
This difference is best typified by BHO’s position on the Clusterfuck. He came out against early and strong, when there was still a risk to that position. Hillary didn’t, even though I am pretty sure she’s smart enough to see where this was leading us.
The split also has a lot to do with the Independents who are supporting Obama. There quite a few of us who won’t vote Democrat if he isn’t the nominee.
This was easily the most significant policy difference between the two. She chose to support the war; he didn’t.
As Yglesias points out, if Hillary had opposed the war initially, or even come around after the fact like Edwards did, there wouldn’t have been a big enough opening to the left for an Obama campaign to gain wide traction in the first place.
So let’s skip past ‘no real policy differences between them’ because it’s not true.
But getting back to the OP: sure, there’s a lot of heat right now, but I’m not worried about it. Did all the Deaniacs from 2004 refuse to support Kerry? Hell, no - they knew that even though Kerry wasn’t their choice, he would have been far better than another four years of Bush. I’m sure the same thing will be true here, once Hillary’s supporters are reminded of the manifold ways in which any resemblance between McCain and a centrist is completely lacking.
I dunno. Some self-identified Pubs or conservatives on this Board have declared they won’t vote for McCain, regardless of whether there’s a right-wing third-party option on the ballot or not; because he’s just not conservative enough for them. Lurking on Free Republic I’ve found a great many who hate McCain almost as much as Clinton; how representative they are is anybody’s guess. Some still seem to be hoping for a Ron Paul resurgence or something.
To me this is something that does not come around very often. The Democrat I want to be president actually is doing well, and looks like he will be the nominee. So I’m quite happy.
I cannot stress enough how BAD it would be for another republican to be back in the White House. So I worked hard through the primaries, and will continue until November.
Perhaps you’re too close? From this side of the Atlantic, it doesn’t seem that way. Indeed the printed press here (sorry, no cite) has remarked on how close Clinton and Obama are on policy.
It’s not as perplexing as the rancor coming from those supporting a candidate whose image is based on being *above * that sort of shit. Sometimes it’s even included actual insinuations of racism, as the OP well knows.
A cut can be both sharp and shallow. That type of wound is the quickest to heal, and least likely to leave a scar, too. I think that’s what this is. But, to occur at all, the healing effort has to be made by the winning candidate’s supporters, not just start and end with a few fine statements from the campaign office and a few photos. It could get very interesting to see, too, not least on this board.
Oh I agree - I’ll also add that a lot of the [presumptive] winning candidates supporters are put off by people saying they will never vote for a “nigger”, and other phrases from our supposed democratic brethren. I believe that is what I was refering to when I mentioned reading the comments section on a lot of these websites. It’s the hate speak that I do not like. I of course, have to put up with it, and I know those folks would never vote Obama anyway, but hate speak about someone’s skin tone and incorrect religious affiliations sting…I don’t know what people have been saying that ranks up there with hate speak for the [presumptive] 2nd place finisher.
Luckily, the mods and general population here on these boards have kept “nominee bashing” at a mild to medium temperature.
Watching the interview with the Obama’s this morning was refreshing and really renewed my faith in the united front coming to the Dems. Interestingly, not one mention of the primaries tomorrow.
I think that it’s just a function of electoral politics. During the post-season you vitriolically hate the team in your division that’s not your own, until the Superbowl, at which time you pick a side to root for.
