Hillusions of grandeur
From John Helton’s PA-primary postmortem on CNN.com: “Look for Clinton to head into upcoming contests with the message that Obama can’t win in the big states like Pennsylvania and Ohio that Democrats will need to regain the White House.”
I cannot be the only one who finds the idea that Clinton is better positioned to beat McCain ridiculous. If Clinton gets the nomination, which I really doubt, I would most likely vote for her — but I would give McCain some serious thought provided he softened his stance on Iraq and some other issues in the interim between the conventions and the general election. I just find Clinton’s candidacy deeply troubling; the story surrounding Richardson’s endorsement of Obama is a pretty good example of why. McCain is equally troubling in terms of certain expedient choices he’s made in the last five or so years, and it really would boil down to a lesser-of-two-evils situation, as it so often does.
But my personal preferences aside, there is just no goddamn way Clinton is going to do better against McCain than Obama. None. Can she bring over some Reagan Democrats? Sure. But Republicans hate her. Hate her. Hate her, hate Bill, hate every single thing she’s ever done or said. Would switch party affiliations for the primary to vote against her. Did so, in thousands of cases, in Pennsylvania. Republicans would consider voting for Obama, I think, particularly if they don’t think McCain’s approach to the war is workable, but not for all the gold in Fort Knox would they vote for Clinton.
I know she and her strategists — what remains of them, at this point — have to say that kind of thing to keep her supporters psyched, but that cheerily delusional spin typifies the problem with her, in a way. I get that she doesn’t want to give up; it’s not like she’s Edwards and she’s miles off the pace. But it’s really better for the Democrats to send a presumptive nominee into the convention, no? Start fund-raising to beat Old Man John? And everyone’s more or less agreed on the fact that she really can’t get the nom, right? So, if what she really wants is the country’s best interests, shouldn’t she just…stay down? But no, we have to continue with the fiction that she has a chance, and waste a bunch of time and money arming for a fight that isn’t the big show.
I mean, maybe Obama can’t win Pennsylvania. But it’s not like she trounced him — and it’s not like she can win it either, if all either of them can count on is Philly. I empathize with her, but I don’t want her to get the nomination, it doesn’t look like she’s going to get it anyway, and that being the case, I wish she’d just pack it in and get out of the damn way.
Tags: politix
I’m with you. Hillary needs to go away already. She can’t get the nomination and is just hurting Obama (and the party) at this point out of pride/ego. Plus, if she somehow got the nomination, she’d have little shot against McCain. I think enough Republicans are disillusioned about the last 8 years that they’d either consider voting Obama or just stay home on election day, but they will come out in force to vote against Hillary. They HATE her.
THANK YOU. The perpetuation of the fiction that she can still win (without serious shenanigans) is quite possibly the strangest thing I’ve ever seen in modern politics. The race was genuinely exciting for a while, but it’s become too pointlessly divisive to make me anything but angry anymore. She’s tearing the party apart for her own selfish interests; I have a hard time understanding, at this point, how it can be viewed any other way. Not to mention that I’ve lost just about every last shred of the respect I ever had for her husband. Out. OUT.
Thank you for making me feel like I’m not crazy, because… this whole entry is one longer, smarter summation of things I’ve been saying since last night, with a rousing choral reply of, “Nuh-uh, that’s nuts!”
The only thing that worries me is this: Going into this vote, Obama had the majority of pledged delegates, and yet somehow those delegates became Clinton’s. I would really like to know what happened there, whether Obama has a plan to countermand and restructure his delegate-grabbing tactics, and why, exactly, he’s still trailing in superdelegates. And I think I’d love to hear your ideas on this, if you’ve got the time and inclination.
Thank you, Sars. I can’t figure out why anyone in the party thinks Hillary’s electable in November. Do they simply not see the hate the Republicans have for her? How can they miss it? Then again, this is a party that’s turned self-sabotage into an art form.
I’m 36, and this is only the 2nd presidential race I’ve gotten rabid about…and the first democratic nomination I’ve been rabid about. I stand and clap for your blogpost, and wish that Hillary would read it and realize she needs to just sit the hell down already.
The problem is…Hillary is still winning. If she was completely losing momentum, it would be one thing to tell her, “go away, you are hurting the party.” But the party is still voting for her enough to push her into the winner’s circle. So there are people who still like her more than Obama.
I don’t really know that either of them having a fighting chance against McCain, because 1. the American people love to repeat history, and 2. there is still a lot of misogyny and racism threading through the society. It is going to depend heavily on the VP candidate.
I agree with you, too, Sars. I used to like the Clintons, but now I just wish they would stop. I thought they were intelligent people…but now I’m not so sure…how can they not see the writing on the wall? Are they really that selfish that they would risk the election for ego? I’m simply agast.
@Sara: I’m at a loss as to how that works; if anyone can point us to some basic resources online that explain 1) what the deal is with the superdelegates generally, and 2) which Democrat has which ones specifically, I’d appreciate it.
I *think* the issue is that superdelegates aren’t bound by their states’ decision; they can vote whichever way they like, and apparently the conventional wisdom is that Hillary (and/or Bill) can pull more of them when it’s crunch time. But I also think that their established policy of “cross us and rue the day” is not a good way to build that kind of concensus, and may have backfired on them in the case of Richardson.
Edited to add that Wikipedia does have an entry on this, which says the so-called superdelegates constitute less than 20% of the overall vote.
You’re right, Sars.
If Hillary is the nominee, ALL IS LOST. She will lose, and lose in a way that makes the soundly, embarrassingly trounced-by-Nixon-in-an-allegedly-can’t-lose-race McGovern look like a frickin victorious gladiator by comparison. I feel like I’m getting a little hysterical here, but this really feels like a do-or-die moment not just for the United States, but for the world; after eight years of the vile nightmare of the Bush II administration, we’ve got this one shot left. It’s the bottom of the ninth, two outs, 3-2 count, people, and even though their closer’s an old guy with a bum arm, I don’t think we’re gonna walk in a run.
An editorial cartoon that sums up my thoughts on Clinton’s continued candidacy. (Or, at least, gives me an excuse to relive Super Bowl 42.)
The analysis on NPR this morning was that the superdelegates have been trickling in on Obama’s side, and that if PA had been closer, or if Obama had even squeaked one out, the trickle would have become a flood. The feeling was that if he wins NC as he’s expected to do and wins Indiana, then Hil’s going to be under a hell of a lot of pressure to pack it in.
In any case, I’m afraid I’m one of those people who just can’t vote for her. I’m not wild about McCain, but I could live with him more than I could with Hillary. I just really REALLY hope John uses some common sense when picking a VP because that individual is going to have a damn good shot at ending up as the President…
Sars-you aren’t the only one. This is exactly what I have been saying for four years. Hillary Clinton cannot get elected in this country. I used to work in an office of all conservative folks who have been going on and on since 2004 about Hillary as President in the same kind of tones they’d talk about a second Hitler. She’s every bit as polarizing as George W. Bush-and the one thing we DON’T need in this country is another 4 years of conservative vs. liberal, Republican vs. Democrat party politics, so that NOTHING gets accomplished.
Hillary, if you want to do a true service to your country, step aside.
On another note, the thing is that I’m not sure Obama can win either. Maybe its just the stupid, prejudiced people I work with-but I hear an UNBELIEVEABLE amount of stupid, prejudiced comments about his supposed Muslim background. (As if it should make a difference even if he WAS Muslim, anyway, but not my point). I’m sure everyone has seen that offensive Osama is a Muslim e-mail that’s circulated the Internet. I’ve also heard everything from he refuses to recite the Pledge of Allegiance to otherwise intelligent people who truly think he is a Islamic terrorist plant who is trying to take over our government. When I hear attitudes like that in the year 2008, it makes me not only sad for this country, but it makes me question whether we will have another Republican in November regardless of who’s the Democratic candidate is.
I really think you hit the nail on the head with this one. The fact of the matter is, she doesn’t have the countries best interests at heart. This has always been about power–specifically her and her husband’s pathological desire of it.
Getting a Democrat in the White House should be cake, what with $4/gallon gas, freakin’ rice riots at Costco and Bush’s 28% approval rating. However, this prolonged Primary battle is weakening the party day by day and clearing the path for McCain to set up his desk blotter in the Oval office.
You’re doing a heck of a job, Hill.
You are so right. I am a rabid Republican but because I am not totally thrilled with McCain I would consider Obama.
But I would NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER!NEVER,EVER, EVER vote for that shrew Hilary.
The thought of listening to that voice for 4+ years and watching Bill showboat for 4+ years makes me physically ill.
The only hope the Dems have is Barak.
@Sars:
Here’s a list of committed superdelegates (which also links to a page of uncommitted superdelegates).
Speaking for the liberal Republicans out there (yes, Virginia, we do exist!) I totally back Sars up about my party’s feelings toward Hillary Clinton. HATE. HER. Hate. Hate. Hate. I’m not a big McCain fan and, personally, I’m ready for the position of leader of the free world to go to someone other than an old white guy. I would seriously consider voting for Obama but a knife to my throat would not compel me to vote for Hillary Clinton. Leaving her politics aside, I find her to be a vile human being and that’s just someone I can’t elect. I think Sars also hit the nail on the head about how difficult it’s going to be to elect a black man or woman to the presidency. You’d think 40 years after the Civil Rights Acts this country would have better race relations but racism is still deeply entrenched in the South especially and I don’t think election 2008 has the ability to overcome it. Maybe people will wise up and prove me wrong though.
One thing that makes me hopeful is a piece I saw the other night on BBC News America. They were interviewing several superdelegates who weren’t party luminaries, but Democratic activists. They were saying that they did not believe that the superdelegates should overturn the will of the people, so they would vote the way that the popular vote (ie pledged delegates) ended up going. Let’s hope the other superdelegates who have not stated publically what they’ll do are of a like mind.
The thing i don’t get is the Hillary camp’s argument that, because she won the “big” states (NY, California, Texas), she somehow has a better chance than Obama. I mean, NY and Cali are going to go democratic regardless of who is the nominee, and Texas is going to go republican no matter what. So the idea that winning these states in a primary between two democrats is some sort of indicator for the general election is just completely ludicrous to me.
I mean, the argument goes that democratic older white women are voting for HRC in the primary, so…what? they’ll switch to McCain in the general? Of course not!
For heaven’s sake, I was an Edwards supporter before he dropped out – just because he lost doesn’t turn me into a Ron Paul supporter!
@kona: er, “country’s,” not “countries.” Although I doubt she gives a crap about Greenland either.
Wow. I did not know that Hilary was that hated. Maybe I’m just clueless…but who voted for her besides me??
What’s killing me is that there’s NO comparison between “can’t win Pennsylvania against Hillary Clinton” and “can’t win Pennsylvania against John McCain.” That’s an asinine, utterly false comparison with no relevance to…anything. Blue-collar Democrats in the industrial parts of Pennsylvania aren’t going to vote for John McCain over Barack Obama just because they voted for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. Nor are they going to vote for Hillary Clinton over John McCain just because they voted for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. You can’t toss out either 45 percent of Democrats or 55 percent of Democrats and still expect to win Pennsylvania, so it seems to me that a strategy for winning Pennsylvania is going to require Obama voters to get behind Clinton or Clinton voters to get behind Obama.
In my experience, people who are voting for Clinton are mostly doing it because they really like her or they think Obama isn’t as experienced as she is. Some people hate him, but among Democrats, I don’t think he has hugely high negatives. She, on the other hand, has substantial contingents of people who detest her, even among Democrats. These particular Obama voters might not vote for McCain if she wins, but they might stay home. I don’t get the feeling that there are a lot of Democrats, even Clinton voters — there are some, but I don’t think there are a lot — whose attitude toward Obama is, “I’d rather stay home than vote for that dude.” So I think it’s obvious that he has a better chance to pick up her primary voters in a general election than he has with hers.
I think what you’re seeing here in the comments is exactly what polls showed ahead of the election that made me believe her unelectability was a foregone conclusion: too many people have already made their minds up about her and hate her guts. Like, HATE HER GUTS. And they hate her husband’s guts, too. I think Bill being out of big politics for a few years misled both of them to believe that anger at him had softened, when in fact, it just quieted down because people didn’t have to look at him. I’m convinced that scab will come clean off very easily, and all those wounds will be opened, and the spookily devoted hatred that led people to straight-facedly accuse them of MURDERING THEIR POLITICAL ENEMIES will come back.
I am 100 percent convinced she cannot win in a general election this year. When I first started hearing the theory that she knows Obama will get the nomination, and she’s damaging him to keep him from winning in November so that she can run in four years, it sounded insane. But now, quite frankly, I’m not so sure. It’s so evident that all she’s doing is damage that I’m starting to think damage has to be the objective — or at least she’s indifferent to it.
“I mean, maybe Obama can’t win Pennsylvania. But it’s not like [Hillary] trounced him — and it’s not like she can win it either, if all either of them can count on is Philly.”
This is actually a very important point. Pennsylvania is only Democractic because of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh; Philly is probably pretty solid because of the poor black vote, but if something happens to make Pittsburgh go Republican than that’s the end of it.
Jess, I don’t think Obama faces so much challenge from racism because of his African American background as because of his supposed Muslim background. I agree that there is a lot of racism and hate still in this country towards black people, even if its far less socially acceptable to be open about it. However, it pales in comparison to the current hatred, prejudice, and fear in this country of Islamic or Middle Eastern people. I think if Obama is the nominee, you will see an unbelieveable and truly disgusting wave of racist, xenophobic backlash in this country the closer we get to November. I’m thinking of how Ann Coulter and her ilk will exploit the fears of the masses and shuddering.
There doesn’t seem to be much of a point to post this on a pro-Obama board because no blog post has ever changed anyone’s mind, but I’m exactly on the opposite site of the fence. I love Hillary and cannot stand Obama. If I wanted a candidate who ran on hope and change and fairy dust, I’d vote for Santa Claus. Just because you talk about change and answer every question you want to avoid with a ‘I practice a new kind of politics’ answer, doesn’t mean that the Republicans will just roll over for you.
That being said, I have few illusions. I know it’ll be Obama on the ticket (although, Hillary is ahead in the popular vote if you count FL and MI). As a life-long Democrat who has never voted for a Republican, in that situation, I will seriously consider voting for McCain.
“When I first started hearing the theory that she knows Obama will get the nomination, and she’s damaging him to keep him from winning in November so that she can run in four years, it sounded insane. But now, quite frankly, I’m not so sure.”
I had the same reaction, and I was talking to Skyrockets about how I couldn’t believe that was her strategy — that that didn’t make sense to me, that it’s unnecessarily destructive, to her as well as to Obama. Skyrockets was like, “Well, that’s you. Her ambition exists in a different proportion from yours.”
And just so we’re clear, this isn’t me giving Obama a pass for the same ambition because he’s a dude. In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing *more* ruthlessness coming from him, because he’s going to get Swiftboated, like it or not, and I hope he’s got better smackdown-fu than Kerry did; that shit was nauseating, not least the way the campaign let it go. The issue is that there may be all there is to her — wanting to win; wanting her adversaries to lose. And being the president is an exhausting, nail-biting, sometimes boring, constantly frustrating slog, it seems to me, and you don’t get a minute off for four years; you really really have to want the job and to want to do the job well. Hillary, I think, wants *us* to want *her* to do the job. There’s a difference.
“If I wanted a candidate who ran on hope and change and fairy dust, I’d vote for Santa Claus.”
At least Santa didn’t lie about sniper fire. Just saying.
But seriously, folks: I’m not saying Obama is a perfect candidate. Ain’t no such animal, and I don’t love his vagueness sometimes either. But after eight years of Bush, honestly? “Maintains a strong relationship with correct English” and “isn’t an asshole” are enough. And Hillary’s only batting .500 there anyway.
“the argument goes that democratic older white women are voting for HRC in the primary”
Oh no I’m not! (speaking for my people…I’m 52)
I feel like a traitor to my gender, as though I’m spitting on the grave of my suffragist grandmother, and they may revoke my Ovary-American status, but I’m not voting for her. I do not trust her…she’s like that girlfriend from seventh grade who will tell your darkest secrets if it garners her more attention. Blecch. (but I see your “so what?” sam.)
http://tinyurl.com/4frdba has a nicely succinct dispassionate accounting of the delegates.
Obama has his flaws, like everyone, but Hillary is just NOT DIPLOMATIC. This is a major problem, since the key function of the president is to serve as a diplomat–the actual politics are tangled up in a lot of bureaucracy. I am of the opinion that we should just hire an actor to serve as the president. I’d nominate Kyle Chandler.
“Clinton gets the nomination, which I really doubt, I would most likely vote for her — but I would give McCain some serious thought provided he softened his stance on Iraq and some other issues in the interim between the conventions and the general election.”
Wow. That is truly disheartening.
He is staunchly pro-life. He will increase troops in Iraq. He has no health-care plan to speak of. Just – gah. No words.
I don’t give a flying fuck if HIllary fights dirty. Good! The Republicans are licking their chops in anticipation of taking down Mr. Clean. The Clintons have years of experience fighting these neo-cons, these CRIMINALS who in the past 8 years have done untold damage to our nation, our planet, our standing in the world and our civil rights. But hey, Obama supporters, don’t worry about any of that. Just pout and vote for McCain if Clinton wins. Nose. Spite. Face.
AUGH. THANK YOU. My own mother, an extremely intellegent woman, has even bought into the whole “But Hillary has experience!” rhetoric and it makes me cry.
Listen. I like Hillary’s positions on most things and I don’t usually like to vote for a president based on character. I thought Bill was great regardless of what he did personally. But something about that woman just gives me the willies. I want a woman to be president, just not like this. The sheer fact that Republicans are willing to vote for Obama over McCain and won’t even consider Hillary scares the crap out of me. She scares the crap out of me and if that makes me a bad feminist, so be it.
I know it’ll be Obama on the ticket (although, Hillary is ahead in the popular vote if you count FL and MI). As a life-long Democrat who has never voted for a Republican, in that situation, I will seriously consider voting for McCain.
~~~~~
Seriously?
You would rather have four more years of the same failed policies and a candidate who supports “another 100 years” in Iraq than to vote for the Democratic nominee if it’s not Hillary?
It is that type of thinking that scares the shit out of me. I may not support Hillary Clinton at the moment, but you’d better bet that if she is the nominee of the Democratic party, I will cast my vote for her in the general election.
This country cannot afford four more years of the same failed policies…not to mention even four more years of war…
I had a rather surreal conversation with my sister, who lives in North Carolina, this weekend. She feels that Hillary is better qualified, and that she’s probably going to vote for Hillary, BUT my sister then admits that she doesn’t really like Hillary. (She used the term “shrill” in describing Hillary.)
When I proceeded to ratle off reasons why I felt Obama was a better candidate (which I won’t run through here), she agreed with me down the line; however, I suspect she’s still going to vote for Hillary next month, out of some sort of allegiance to her sex. (My sister is a scientist, and she sees a lot of sex discrimination in her field, so I understand why she’s somewhat incensed by the older more qualified woman being upstaged by a younger man.) Anyway.
I want Hillary to go away, but I know that she won’t, unless there is a clear movement by the superdelegates away from her – yes, I get that she and Bill are determined, and that they’re fighters, but she cannot win the general election. Hillary on the ticket in November will energize the Republican faithful like nothing else possibly could.
Also, I have very mixed emotions about Hillary as a presidential candidate. While I’m thrilled that a woman has a viable shot at being the party’s nominee, I really, really wish it was a woman who earned her own way there, like a Dianne Feinstein or a Nancy Pelosi. Hillary would never have been elected to the Senate if she was not married to Bill, and she’s effectively offering herself up as the 3rd term option for Bill that the constitution doesn’t allow.
Last, my other objection to Hillary is that we need someone in the White House who isn’t a Bush or a Clinton. Since 1980, there has been a Bush or a Clinton running in the President or VP slot – with more than 300 million Americans, can’t we get someone else!
Please, please, please everyone – I urge you to delve very carefully and deeply into McCain’s background and platform before deciding, as lifelong Democrats (as some of you are saying) to vote for him over either Obama or Clinton (depending on your view). McCain has made great strides in appearing to be a moderate, reform-oriented candidate, but in most of my measures he is still far more conservative and anti-progressive than either potential Democratic candidate. He thinks Al Qaeda is training in Iran, supports limiting the availability of abortion to only rape/incest victims or life-threating cases, opposes a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq, opposes gay marriage, hopes to make Bush’s tax cuts permanent, believes it should be up to local school districts to decide if creationism should be taught in science classes, and recently voted NO (siding with Bush!) on a bill to ban waterboarding (and other Abu Ghraib-style interrogation tactics) (the bill passed anyway, vetoed by Bush). He supports “allowing the CIA to use extra measures.”
I appreciate the “maverick” image the media has bestowed upon McCain, but looking at his statements, votes, and beliefs over the long-term force me to conclude that he won’t substantially change what has happened under the current administration. I hope more research will help other “Not Hillary” or “Not Obama” Democrats understand his platform more clearly.
The “if Michigan and Florida counted” and “caucuses are undemocratic” arguments freaking kill me. The spin of the day from her camp is apparently that she’d be winning if you counted the states that don’t count and don’t count the caucus states that do. Well, then hand her the nomination right now!
I don’t understand how anyone could be a supporter of Clinton OR Obama and say they’ll vote for McCain if their candidate isn’t the Democrats’ nominee. Can someone explain that? I’d vote for a slab of concrete if it prevented a policy of “100 years in Iraq” and the opportunity to put more conservatives on the Supreme Court.
I don’t have a problem with either Hilary or Obama, but I kind of think that Hilary stands a better chance. Why? Yes, Republicans hate her. But I think, in the South in particular the bigger question is: Who do people hate more? Blacks or a white woman? Much to my dismay I think Hilary would be more likely to win them over, hated by Republicans or not.
“In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing *more* ruthlessness coming from him, because he’s going to get Swiftboated, like it or not, and I hope he’s got better smackdown-fu than Kerry did; that shit was nauseating, not least the way the campaign let it go.”
I actually think that he’s shown a lot of backbone when it comes to McCain. Whenever McCain has tried to attack Obama in the past, Barack’s thrown the facts of McCain’s voting record back in his face (No body armor, no GI bill, etc.)
The truth is that the math doesn’t clearly support either candidate, either for the nom or for the general race. Look at http://www.realclearpolitics.com for a breakdown of the numbers. Obama has a better shot, but it’s not so clearly decided that it makes sense for anyone to give up on Clinton (especially Clinton herself.)
I agree that Hillary should face reality and throw in the towel. She’s not going to be the Democratic nominee, and she’s hurting the party and its nominee by drawing this out.
But I also think that Obama or Clinton is each capable of defeating McCain. Clinton is easier for McCain to run against, and she’ll inspire more crazed activity from hard-core Republican loyalists who might otherwise be lukewarm about McCain. But McCain’s positions on Iraq and his support of Bush’s failed economic policies both make it hard for him to win in the fall.
(And I also don’t understand how anyone who would support Obama or Clinton would consider McCain if their preferred candidate doesn’t get the nomination. Ultimately, he’s a batshit crazy old man who isn’t at all a moderate and who is woefully ignorant in the one area (national security) that he claims as his strength.)
Not that this is necessarily better, but I considered whether I could vote for McCain and ultimately decided that if Clinton ultimately grabs the nomination somehow…I’m probably not going to go to the polls. I have the luxury of living in a state so blue that I’m not really standing up for anything by voting for whatever Dem is on the ticket, and while I cherish my right to vote, deeply, the substance of that vote is more important to me than the mere fact of getting to cast it, and at this point, I could not in good conscience cast a ballot for Hillary Clinton. It makes me feel yucky, but not as much as either of the alternatives.
“But I think, in the South in particular the bigger question is: Who do people hate more? Blacks or a white woman?”
I think that I can say fairly certainly that in the Deep South–Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana–the answer is Hilary. Obama won in all of those states and it’s true that there is a large African American population in each that helped him do that, but I still think that there plenty of white southern Dems who would eat ground glass before they would vote for Hilary Clinton. I was at a wedding in Alabama last week and I heard some pretty strong opinions on the Hilary matter. People down there HATE her.
The problem for me with voting for Hillary, if she gets the nom, is that it rewards what I think has been a relentlessly negative and destructive campaign. I’ll probably get there and vote for her, but I’m not going to start writing checks overnight.
(Sorry this is so long; hope my attempts at embedding links worked.)
The Slate also has a good electoral-math tally thing, which includes not only pledged delegates but also superdelegates and popular vote counts. (The Slate also has the always-enjoyable Hillary Deathwatch.)
In the 20 (!) years in which I’ve been eligible to vote, I’ve always been of the opinion that Democratic Party could nominate a freakin’ rutabaga and I’d vote for it, but I’ve realized in the past five months that I cannot and will not vote for Hillary Clinton. Here’s just the top five on my hit parade of reasons:
1) Don’t base your campaign on your experience, exaggerate that experience in the stupidest possible way, and then joke about it when you are found out. “Ha ha! I lied to you about being under sniper fire! Isn’t that funny!?†NO.
2) Don’t praise the presumptive Republican nominee at the same time you are insulting your Democratic rival. And then have the gall to cry foul when HE offers the lukewarm and undeniable statement that any of the three candidates would be better than Bush.
3) You’re not going to win me over, as an (initially rather tepid) Obama supporter, by sarcastically mocking what I and millions of others are responding to in him (and by extension, my intelligence in “falling for itâ€).
4) The grossly irresponsible statements Clinton’s made in the past week about putting the entire Mideast under an “umbrella†of American protection and “obliterating†Iran if it makes a strike against Israel. I know she’s trying to make herself look tougher by saber-rattling, but at what immediate and long-term cost?
5) Bill Clinton. I have to wonder: Is he intentionally trying to sabotage her campaign? Some psychology graduate student needs to write a dissertation on that, toot suite. Because, goddamn.
Also, I do not want to elect him to a co-presidency. He’s strutted and fretted more than his hour upon the stage; get the big hook and get him the hell off, already.
I initially thought, well, if, God forbid, Clinton is the nominee, maybe I’ll look at John McCain. But I’ve realized I can’t vote for him, either:
1) I always thought, “Well, one thing is certain: at least McCain will never condone torture.†But maybe not.
2) I can’t vote for any man who would say this about an (at the time) 18-year-old.
3) I can’t vote for any man who would call his wife the “c†word.
I used to have a lot of respect for McCain, so I have been surprised to find that he is batting .000 on Sars’s (can we still call you “Sars�) very valid litmus test (continually confusing “Sunnis†with “Shiites†= not a strong relationship with correct English, among other things; casual misogyny = assholitude).
So, if Obama is not the nominee, I think I’m going to have to stay home in November, for the first time in my voting life. Wow. Or maybe I’ll just write in “Rutabaga.â€
“”But I think, in the South in particular the bigger question is: Who do people hate more? Blacks or a white woman?”
In a way it doesn’t matter. Those states are going to go Republican either way. What matters is PA, FL and OH.
Heh…Sars has uncovered my nefarious plot to get Madam Former First Lady Rodham-Clinton the Democratic nomination simply because she’d bring out the Republican base in DROVES and guarantee a McCain win. While he’s not my first choice, I certainly prefer him to Obama (whose lack of experience scares the snot out of me) or Hillary (who just scares me).
It still surprises me to _NOT_ hear this idea on any of the political analysis I’ve heard on TV and the radio.
But to all the folks who talk about not going to the polls in the fall if any certain candidate gets the nomination, please remember that there are a whole lot more contests than just the presidential one. You can leave that one blank if you wish to abstain, but still go out and vote! Just remember that if you don’t participate, you shouldn’t really complain about the outcome.
As of March 26th, 28% of Hillary supporters said they wouldn’t vote for Obama if he gets it, whereas 19% of Obama’s said they wouldn’t vote for Clinton. Neither is a particuarly nice number, but it’s not a preponderance of Obama supporters who seem to relish sliced-off nasal orifices. I’m hoping that the numbers are artificially inflated by primary ill-will and that the party will rally around the nominee.
If you’re a dem and you can’t vote for Hillary/Barack, then vote against McCain. We need the neoconservatives as far away from power as we possibly can get them, and McCain isn’t distant enough from them. And if you like Antonin Scalia’s flavor of jurisprudence, then by all means vote for McCain: you will get, at best, Roberts-like nominees and at worst, well . . .
Obama and Clinton have virtually identical policy positions, so what it’s coming down to now is personality. Many of my friends and family fall firmly into the Obama camp based on his rhetoric of hope and change and associated ability to form complete sentences, and I admit that Obama has much more going on in the personality department than Hillary Clinton. Yet I wonder what would happen if we decided to not elect a president based on charisma or ability to make voters want to have a beer (or boilermaker) with the candidate. So much of what I hear from the Obama supporters that I work with comes down to negative comments about Hillary Clinton’s personality (“shrewish” is a particularly telling adjective when you think about it). The long, sad debacle of the past 8 years has illuminated the danger of voting based on likeability (George W., most popular guy at the corner bar) or rhetoric of change (“compassionate conservatism,” anyone?). I’d like to see a discussion of the candidates’ merits that isn’t based on “hate her, love him” (or vice versa), a fine-tooth-comb parsing of speeches from 10 years ago, or a Rovian invocation of the dangers of a female/black president. Perhaps that’s asking too much.
As Becki and others said… despite being a life-long, dyed-in-the-wool Republican, if it comes down to a McCain vs. Obama election, I will give some serious consideration to crossing party lines and voting Obama.
On the other hand, on the off chance that it is Hillary in the general election – give me signs and banners, I will be campaining my ever-living heart out for McCain. As someone else (not sure who, sorry) said… many of us Republicans feel the same way about Hillary as the Dems and fair number of us Reps feel about Bush. This country does NOT need 4-8 more years of the extreme divisiveness we’ve just gone through.
“provided he softened his stance on Iraq and some other issues in the interim between the conventions and the general election”
Is this even remotely likely? He’s made a lot of very extreme statements that would be very tough to live down/back away from. He’s not at all a moderate in his policy positions, and I don’t think he can get elected as one in the fall, so I don’t think he’s going to suddenly start acting like one again. I mean, this is the man who thinks a summer gas tax holiday would be a great idea when it would cost a federal budget already in deep deficit trouble $10 billion. Not to mention encourage us to pollute the planet even more than we already are. Oil is not going to get cheaper in the long run. We can’t suspend the gas tax permanently, or we’ll have no roads to drive on. Saying we should do it is Crazy Shit (TM).
McCain sold out his previous credibility for (supposed) electability. I don’t think there’s any going back for him.
And I have to say, of the two Dems remaining I dislike Obama less because I think he has a more positive style. (I lost any actual “liking” for anyone in this race when Edwards dropped out.) But their policies are very close. No matter how you dislike the person, it doesn’t make much policy sense for anyone considering voting for either Obama to Clinton to switch to McCain.
Compared to Bush, each of the 3 candidates seems like a glowing golden god. I still like Hillary best, though.