ABC Wash Post Poll: 64% of Dems Think Hillary Should Stay in Race- Page 3

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:03pm

As someone who came to support Obama after losing his first choice (Johnny E., I miss you!!!) and thinking long and hard about the remaining two (neither whom I was totally thrilled about), I can say that I have not been what some call Obamacans. Or Obamabots. Or whatever they are called.

I can understand (sort of) the passionate support engendered by both candidates.

But I have to tell you, the manic, wild-eyeness that can be read into some of the posts regarding Clinton's chances is truly unnerving. And, frankly, seems just as crazy as the throw-your-shoe-at-the-preacher ecstasies of the Obama crowd.

Can she end up with the nomination? Sure...if Obama dropped dead. Or if it turns out he was, for a brief moment, a Catholic priest who raped altar boys (at least he wouldn't be a Muslim!), or if he makes a mistake the likes of which we've never seen in the political history of this country. But that's really about it.

But...like Auggie, I say let the race play itself out. I, for one, see no real damage being done. I also know of NO gay Dems who would even begin to entertain the idea of voting for McCain. And they were all for Clinton.

It's interesting that while we're all beating our breasts over this Democratic 'crisis', the Republican Party is splintering in much more dramatic ways. I never thought I'd say it, but God bless you, Bob Barr and Ron Paul. Keep up the good work boys!

[tazber]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:10pm

"If you're willing to vote for someone WHO IS DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO EVERYTHING YOU BELIEVE IN just so a black man isn’t elected president, then you're a racist. And an idiot."


How the hell do you know what I do or do not believe in? Electing a president isn't so mickey mouse as you think it is. The war is ONE of many issues. Intelligent people find out where a candidate stands on ALL the issues before making a decision.

But I suppose you're happy making assumptions about people you don't know and wearing the blinders you have on your bloated head.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 01:10 PM

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:19pm

People choose their candidate for a variety of reasons- experience, personality, elect-ability, fund raising acumen. Saying that someone who doesn't support Obama must be racist is a stupid as saying people who don't support Clinton are sexist.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:23pm

But basically, the onus is on Obama to woo the Clinton supporters and the white working class. You cannot say that the onus is on the voters to "fall into line." That's not how elections are won.

If Obama doesn't do something BIG and dramatic to win over those two distinct groups of voters, McCain will slip in the back door, aided by a media that has decided to ignore his faults.

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:26pm

It's not his race I don't like, it's his uppity attitude. I don't trust blacks who don't speak in ebonics. I want a President who I feel would shine my shoes if I needed them shined.

Luscious, you have my people nailed to the wall with your accurate assumptions. (You idiot.)

[The Boy From Ohio]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:30pm

I'm hoping for a big Hillary win. But everytime she does win Obama seems to pull more Super's out of his hat. I know Obama pretty much has it in the bag, but I still have my fingers crossed for Hillary.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:31pm

Oh I long for the sharp observation and piercing wit of the man who yelled "IRON MY SHIRT!: at Hillary Clinton.
Updated On: 5/13/08 at 01:31 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:34pm

One problem is that some people consider Obama way left of Clinton. And they would rather vote right of Clinton.

We have to combat this.

One problem is that some people don't trust Obama. They know nothing of substance about him. He comes off like a phony to them. And because they fear some of his rabid supporters, he feels cultist to them.

We have to combat this.

The worst problem is that SOME people are indeed racist.

We have to combat this.

Acknowledging the obstacles is being honest and the only way to conquer those obstacles in order to win.

We must win. It's not us "wavering" on Obama. It's us wanting to win.

Finally, any Clinton support by some of us or hope she ends up the nominee doesn't mean we aren't going to back Obama if he gets this. It's that we are not robots who can turn off one opinion completely for another. Do I still wish Clinton was going to be the nominee? Yes. If she beats him out for the nomination somehow will I be glad? Yes.

It's nothing to get worked up about. What will be will be.

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:34pm

PJ - I agree with you that the onus is upon Obama's campaign. However, I think it's more of his getting the message out rather than having to do anything dramatic. He is proposing a middle class tax cut, and McCain favors extending Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. McCain is going around telling people that they've been better off during the Bush years, and he continues to support an unpopular war. Obama is proposing a comprehensive health care plan, while McCain has proposed a plan that has absolutely no chance of succeeding.

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 1:39pm

"The worst problem is that SOME people are indeed racist.

We have to combat this."

I agree, but that can't be accomplished in six months. A couple of the major news sites have posted stories today about the blatant racism being encountered by Obama's workers. It's rather scary.

"I'm hoping for a big Hillary win. But everytime she does win Obama seems to pull more Super's out of his hat. I know Obama pretty much has it in the bag, but I still have my fingers crossed for Hillary."

Obama has announced three more superdelegates today, and I would expect even more tomorrow. His superdelegate gain this week will likely be more than the total pledged delegates in West Virginia.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:01pm

"If she beats him out for the nomination somehow will I be glad? Yes."

This statement is troubling. Very, very troubling. Because it is ignoring the reality of the situation. Clinton will not be able to surpass him math-wise. Florida could help close it, but Michigan is a major problem. Someone described it as a 'Soviet-style election.' An truly...that's what it would be, were it to count in the way Clinton wants it to count.

If last Tuesday played out much differently, a plausible road to the nomination was still an option. Post-N.C. and Indiana, if Clinton manages to win this nomination (particularly by 'moving goal posts'), it will destroy the party. It just will.

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:01pm

I suppose the SNL skit was taken LITERALLY by some?

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:07pm

Also...I don't necessarily agree with Luscious's assertion.

But so many of you here have twisted what he/she has said that I'm shocked. Luscious did not say that if you vote for Clinton over Obama you're a racist. He/She said that if you supported Clinton over Obama and will now turn your allegience to McCain, you're a racist.

Now...I don't agree with that generalization. But I would like to hear from some the rationale behind it. I mean...do you really want to spite your face that much?

[StageManager2]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:11pm

"He is the leader, and once his ambitious and unscrupulous rival is out of the way, 'ordinary, hard-working Americans', both black and white will vote for him. Just believe!"

WestEndAndy: Are you for real? You sound more like a Red Sox fanatic, circa 2004.


"If you are true Democrats, you should be giving Obama 100% support, not the kind of faint-hearted semi-support some of you have shown."

Uh, I'm not a Democrat (registered Independent), thus I don't feel an obligation to the party. I vote for the candidate, not because of partisanship.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 02:11 PM

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:15pm

Hillary staying in only gives her supporters the hope that she can win the nomination. RobbieJ pointed out why this is dumb. As long as her supporters think she can pull it out somehow they will look for any and every reason to dislike Obama and entertain the notion that he is unfit for the presidency or unprepared to defeat John McCain.

Barack Obama has presumably won the nomination by making serious inroads with Hillary Clinton's supporters. I point to Texas, Indiana. His "problem" with the white working class is simple--it's Hillary Clinton. I point to Pennsylvania, Ohio, 3 AM ads, "hard working white Americans". It's imperative that she drop out. He can't woo her voters until then. Her time has passed. It's time to start fighting McCain. She needs to help.

Yes, Republicans will make the same arguments, but there is a big difference between a Republican making that argument and a popular Democrat.

I do think Luscious has a certain point, although it's not being expressed the way it could be. Hillary Clinton has made the race case blatant. She put the cards on the table. She made the argument. She's not transcending the argument of race, she's capitulating to it and giving in to it. Worse yet, she's playing to it, using it.

Sorry, that's not leadership. And I get angry. I can't believe we're still arguing about the merits of a Clinton presidency versus an Obama candidacy. It's time for Democrats to win in November. Let's stop worrying about why Obama can't win. There are very real reasons why McCain can't win. Let's focus on that. Let's start with August 29th birthday parties.

I just want to make it clear that Hillary does NOT always know best. If she did, she'd have won the nomination. If she did, maybe we'd have had health care for quite a while.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/opinion/05brooks.html

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:16pm

We really should STOP discussing race. It's just not going to be the issue come the General Election.

Because the people who won't vote for him are going to tell themselves, each other and the media that it's not that he's black--it's that he's LEFTIST.

They will say (and it's probably true) that they would happily have voted for Colin Powell as the first African-American president, just not Barack Obama.

Now I happen to me among the people who think that both he and Hillary have not been leftist ENOUGH, but that's neither here nor there. Somehow she was able to convince the very people who USED to dislike her that she was on their side.

So that's the task for the Obama campaign: to mold his voting record into something the Swing States can get behind. He has to inspire a whole new group of wary and skeptical voters the same way he inspired young people, African Americans and the "Creative Class."

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:18pm

The racism doesn't even begin to hold a candle to the misogyny I STILL see in this primary.

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:22pm

Phyllis - I have to disagree:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/13/politics/washingtonpost/main4090746.shtml?source=mostpop_story

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:24pm

The only chance she has left is if somehow she leads in the popular vote. That actually could happen. It's not dumb (thank you, roninjoey, for such respect and class).

I don't agree with the assertion that Hillary has been playing the race card. Discussing the demographics is not racist. I can see how some people would think it is, but it is not definitively so. It's an issue we have to combat regardless of who the nominee is.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:26pm

Well, let me rephrase that. It doesn't hold a candle to the misogyny I have perosnally seen, both on and off this board.

[tazber]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:28pm

"But I would like to hear from some the rationale behind it. I mean...do you really want to spite your face that much?"

What everyone seems to forget is that just because someone labels themselves a dem/repub doesn't mean they have to vote that way.
McCain is a very liberal republican, a lot of democrats don't like Obama and don't consider McCain such a bad option regarding social issues.
So we have a republican candidate who liberal leaning voters can feel good about, but a democratic candidate who conservative leaning voters would never consider.
If it was Pat Buchanan it would be a different story. Or if McCain chooses Huckabee as a running mate things will likewise change.
But as it is, the republican candidate isn't that scary to people on the left.
That doesn't make anyone a racist, or a traitor, or anything else. It means that Obama has to work hard to get those potential democrats who aren't voting for him back. So far, he's doing a piss poor job of it.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:29pm

"I don't agree with the assertion that Hillary has been playing the race card. Discussing the demographics is not racist. I can see how some people would think it is, but it is not definitively so."

It's this statement that makes me pause. Especially combined with Phyllis' assertion that there is far more misogyny than racism in this campaign.

I cannot think of one instance in which Obama has used Clinton's gender against her. I can think of several instances of what I would call race-baiting by the Clinton campaign and now, Clinton herself. BUT...it's just called analyzing demographics.

Oh...and for the record, I didn't find her saying that white people vote for her offensive. It was her conflating 'hard-working' and 'white' that I found rather awful.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:35pm

Calling Clinton a c*nt and bitch, referring to her as "vaj," impugning her because she's ambitious, or "calculating" are extensions of misogyny. I'm not talking about Obama, I'm talking about his supporters (sorry if I wasn't clear originally, but I thought we were talking about racist people not voting for him, not racism or misogyny coming directly from the candidates themselves).


Updated On: 5/13/08 at 02:35 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:39pm

Well, do you really think it's useful to debate whether she MERELY meant to pay tribute to one group of voters she was saying were ignored or whether she REALLY meant to say that other voters are un-hardworking?

To portray inadvertent racism as race-baiting is wasting precious time and energy. It's just more Gotcha Politics.

What we REALLY should be talking about is how to get those voters to vote for Obama.

THAT'S the difficult task ahead of Democrats.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 02:39 PM

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 2:40pm

And the disconnect between you and me about this topic is something that I think is clouding a lot of stuff. I thought part of the discussion was the race-baiting in the campaigns...and that your response was about misogyny in the campaigns. I just saw your post about it being on and off the board with people you know.

I have no idea if people are voting for Clinton because she's a cracker or for Obama because he has a c*ck. And, in a lot of ways, I don't care. What I do care about is how the campaigns have conducted themselves in regards to these topics. And I find the fact that statements made by Clinton and her surrogates could be perceived as race-baiting troublesome.

But if we're talking about this board? Well...that's just a cornucopia of crazy. And I just don't have the strength, lady!!