Well, surely McCain has a better shot at the presidency than either Mr. Nader or Mr. Mouse? I’ll agree that given the last 8 years of Republican misrule that McCain is facing a steep uphill battle. But the Democratic nominee isn’t guaranteed victory, especially since the nominee is going to be either differently pigmented or differently gendered. Maybe we’ll come to find that Americans really are as racist as some people think. I sure hope not, but the American people have let me down before.
I think this is a big part of it. Although Obama and Clinton are similar policy-wise, I don’t like the way the Clintons play the game. I never voted for Bill. I’d vote for Hillary over McCain, but I’d be glad that as an Independent, I wasn’t associated with her party.
This was a policy difference? He was less gullible than she was, sure, and perhaps a bit braver (though at the time he had less to lose.) But as of today, both of them oppose the war and McCain supports it.
As for the OP, Hillary has stopped attacking Obama, and has been focusing on the positives of her case, so I’m sure she will get behind him totally after June 3. No one will even remember the rift by September.
This sort of thing concerns me. If McCain wins it must be racism or misogyny, because he can’t win on his own merits? How many times do the Democrats have to lose before this type of arrogance goes away?
These “merits” of which you speak? A bit fuzzy on those, hard to bring clearly into focus. What might they be?
It seems respectful to allow someone to choose how they want to brand themselves. Sen. Clinton has chosen “Hillary” as her specific product name of the Clinton line of products. It’s on all her posters. She has invited that as the way to distinguish her from the former President without including “Senator” or “Ms.” or “Mrs.” or full names or initials.
That was her team’s marketing choice and using it is in no way disrespectful.
But I’m not a Democrat. I’m one of those internet libertarian conservative types. I’m not planning on voting for Obama because he’s a Democrat, I’m voting for him for other reasons. So I could stipulate to the notion that I’m arrogant, but I refuse to accept that my arrogance or lack thereof is an instance of Democratic party arrogance.
I don’t think that McCain can only win due to bigotry by the American voters. Just that there exist people who would be happy to vote for Obama, except they won’t because he’s half Negro. How large is that voting bloc? I think it’s pretty small, but maybe I’m wrong. If McCain wins, and his margin of victory is smaller than that bloc of racist voters, then it will be factually true that McCain won only because of racism. If he wins, and his margin of victory is greater than that bloc of racist voters, then it will be false that he won because of racism.
The complicating factor is that no one knows exactly how large that bloc is. My sense that the bloc is pretty small could be naive. Maybe that bloc is substantial. And hence my worry that the American voters would let me down.
He could conceivably win on the Republican Party brand, if it were not a drug on the market this year.
But, no, he can’t win on his own merits, not stacked against Obama, or for that matter Clinton.
That’s just silly. Clinton or Obama couldn’t win without the Democrat (or “not Republican”) brand, either.
McCain undoubtedly has the weaker brand name behind him this year, and it still seems like an uphill battle for anyone that wants to beat him. I think he’s a solid candidate.
How are you counter balancing your equation here with the people who will vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black? Or do you think that this bloc of voters is either non-existent or inconsequential?
Personally I think whoever wins, wins…and that racism or other excuses should be left out of the discussion one way or the other. My feelings on this are that if BUSH could win then McCain certainly could to…and we need not bring race into the mix of reasons it could happen.
YMMV of course.
-XT
Race is a part of the equation, though. Not wanting to talk about it doesn’t make it not so.
Race hurts Obama mostly in places where it matters most (in some swing states with small black populations, like Florida), and race helps Obama mostly in places where it matters least (in guaranteed Republican states with large black populations, like Georgia). I think that racism is more of an obstacle for his campaign than it is a help.
And I think you are wrong, but concede that MMV. I’ve been hearing all this about race for a while though…while watching Obama pretty much defy the dire chicken little type predictions.
Personally I think in the end he will stand or fall based on his politics and how they play to the center…and I think his eloquence, poise and charisma will ultimately be the determining factor.
-XT
Whoa! Hold on there. Please, I never made any excuses that calling Senator Clinton a Bitch was OK. As a matter of fact I have been the first to not sling shit. I have always maintained she is a good person. I’ve got nothing against her as a human being.
Ok, Carry on.
Right, you’ve been all over the “Fork Hillary” threads trying to get that shit stopped, haven’t you? :dubious:
I haven’t been trying to stop it, only trying not to sling it.
Well it seems like Clinton may be being noble.
Noble, schmoble. As long as she drops out pretty soon and campaigns hard, and persuasively, for Obama thereafter.
I’m sure her campaign is planning it right now - as we speak as a matter of fact! I’m sure even Obama’s camp knows about it, and has no reason to say anything until after June 3rd. Pretty much exactly what Obama said in a recent interview with Robin Roberts,
It is telling that among the reasons you wondered about regarding Obama-hating, you left out the actual reason (for many, such as myself): he’s too inexperienced to be running for POTUS and yet he continues to draw huge crowds and is immensely popular. To those of that feel that he is too green (which is not the same thing as merely being young) on the national political scene, it is annoying beyond imagination that he is so popular despite that fact and it feels to us that this is not due to excitement over his policies or his inexperience. It’s excitement due to the fact that he’s a novelty act partly due to his race and other intangibles.
When one side feels that the other side is literally delusional and voting for their candidate for all the wrong reasons (not policy differences, but hype and rhetoric – again, this is how some of us feel; obviously Obama supporters would disagree that this is their reason) but anyway when one side feels that the other is voting for shallow, “pop” reasons then not only is there a rolling of the eyes but among some (perhaps WV) there is in addition to that a sense of affirmation action gone haywire sensibility that we sense; as Obama himself alluded to in his race speech the “notion” (his favorite word) that white liberal eggheads can vote for him to get off cheap with a race forgiveness so to speak that’s purged; and the black community voting for him at 92% due, obviously, to his policy on increasing regulations on the banking industry. :rolleyes:
Finally, we’re also tired of being referred to as racists when we point out that, for example, blacks are voting for him because he’s black to a degree that is not comparable to women voting for HRC just because she’s a woman: and that’s because she’s been on the scene so there’s more to judge by than just that as where this man has been on the national scene for 2 years. Give me a break. It is more acceptable to be sexist than racist. A guy held up a sign at a Clinton rally that said “Iron my shirt!” – haha; now if a guy held up a sign at an Obama rally that said “Shine my shoes!” would that be seen as equal? Not at all. The press would be all over the latter; but nary a word about the former to the same degree. We point that out and…guess what…we’re whining. And so on.
Yes, yes, there’s tons of votes for HRC because she’s female, but not 92% of women or 92% of whites vote for her. Were that to have been the case in state after state, don’t you think racism would be called out?
But when O gets a 92% racial vote, it isn’t called out.
Those types of double standards can make a person crazy and it happens to dovetail with O’s style of campaigning (which is, admittedly, politically brilliant and optimally suited to the current age) of making everything a wash and changing the subject. He says something. It’s pointed out. He accuses you of pointing it out. He wins.
Of course that leads to vitriol. It’s like HRC said right from the start at that one debate “It’s kind of hard having a straight up debate with you, Barack, because you never take responsibility for your votes.”
She got booed for that.
When he started in on Wal Mart, he didn’t get booed.
And so on and so on. It very much reads to some like don’t pick on the little black boy it’s not fair you big mean monstrous bitch!
And that’s what we had with Bush/Gore: don’t pick on Bush, he’s obviously a well-meaning idiot Gore you egghead bully! And now we have Obama don’t pick on him he’s politically correct and even running with a disadvantageous name (as he put it)! That’s just the soft racism of lowered expectations (holy crap, I’m quoting the Shrub) and it’s condescending and demeaning to black people.
Now all of the above can be debated until we all turn mixed-race-colored in the face but the point is just that this is how it feels, how it seems, and is one answer as to why the vitriol is – for some, like me – truly irreparable.
It would be like you coming together with Bush (aside from policies) on a personal level if you find him to be an annoying human being. To me, O seems self-satisfied, smug, superior, and out of line in pretty much every way from acting as if he’s an unannounced moderator at the debates, declaring what is and isn’t appropriate to debate, talking over people, etc. to silly things that nonetheless convey a sense of who he is with his little sweety comments, bitter comments, blah, blah. The man is just thoroughly unlikeable to me.
Can’t imagine ever coming together with that.
And I have NO DOUBT that those that feel similarly (for other reasons) about HRC are of the same mindset. They see her as evil incarnate so how can they ever come together with her no matter what? That, of course, is not counting the sexism and racism that is also at play I’m sure for both but that just overlaps and I don’t think is the main reason people don’t like O and HRC but it’s a convenient reason for O in that it inspires the eggheads to ‘stand up’ for the man against strawman racists when really the bulk of the kickback to him isn’t that, it’s just the fact that he’s too green to be there and the fact that he gets not only a standing but popularity and now apparent complete success seems to be based on things that are so stupid and shallow as to engender contempt for the whole candidacy. Not because he’s (half) black.
And that’s my 20 cents. LOL
Yeah. Because HRC could never do anything noble. Impossible. That would be like Obama doing something hypocritical. Impossible.
What was the OP again? LOL