ABC Wash Post Poll: 64% of Dems Think Hillary Should Stay in Race- Page 5

[Luscious]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:14pm

"What it IS time for is THIS: It's time for Obama supporters to stop demonizing Hillary."

Agreed. And it's also time for Clinton supporters to stop demonizing Obama.

And I'd still like to know how and why an avid Hillary supporter would vote for McCain over Obama if they're voting based on the issues.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 03:14 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:16pm

That's the wrong question. That's a question that starts an argument.

You should be asking how to win over that avid Hillary supporter.

How do you think Obama can do that, Luscious? The ball's in the court of the Obama campaign.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:17pm

PalJoey, there are people in both camps doing their damnedest to demonize either candidate. They don't matter, they are merely supporters. What matters is that Hillary Clinton herself seems to be trying to make the case that Obama is unelectable. This isn't healthy for a Democratic party that wants to win in November.

Phyllis, Hillary Clinton herself tried to make the case that Obama was ambitious and calculating. Remember the kindergarten essay? The uppity black guy storyline is as alive as the calculating shrew storyline. I think Hillary couldn't ask for a better storyline than the one she's got, actually. The fighter.

I do feel that those Reagan Democrats are a tricky bunch and maybe Hillary could stop trying to convince them that if she doesn't win, it means their voices won't be heard--especially since she and Obama stand so close on so many issues. The voting electorate isn't splitting quite so evenly as that.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:17pm

I don't disagree with that. But, at this point, he's going to be the nominee. Four more superdelegates today. He's the nominee.

And you admitted as much last week. But now, she's the comeback kid again, who still has a fighting chance at the nomination. She doesn't. Unless something MASSIVE happens.

I mean...Everything's Coming Up Roses?? It's done. Letting it play itself out and letting the rest of the states vote in the primaries is a great way to end this historic time. I have no problem with it. But it's done.

I hope to Christ Kelli O'Hara doesn't win the Tony, otherwise, on June 16, we'll be putting you into a home.

Oh...and that's a by the way.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:18pm

And I actually am not sure what Reverend Wright has to do with her comments

Because it's the same kind of pandering.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:21pm

May I bring us back to the ABC polls, which are the cornerstone, theoretically, of this thread...

In addition to the quoted poll, despite the majority feeling Clinton should not drop out, 62% think Obama is stronger against McCain.

And in the same poll of head to head match-ups:

Obama -- McCain 51% - 44%
Clinton -- McCain 49% - 46%

Do I think those polls are sustainable? Not remotely. But today's window into the electorate is a bit more complicated than determining how many people believe Clinton should stay or go. And too many people consistently ignore Clinton's negative, 54%, the highest among the three. That's another current window into how the electorate thinks, and must also be considered. It's worth remembering how Fox News salivates about a Clinton run; they and other right wing orgs know Clinton galvinizes their base. That is not my opinion.

Neither Clinton nor Obama is the sure thing. Surely all of us understandthat. He's won 31 states, she's won 16. If you add Florida and Michigan, and then West Virginia and Kentucky, he's still won more states. Should that be the only factor? No. But let's not keep ignoring these other pieces of the puzzle when we argue about electability. The puzzle has many pieces, and their shapes evolve.

Stay in the race, Senator Clinton. Seat Michigan and Florida, DNC. Keep your eye on the big picture, electorate; it's a complicated one.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 03:21 PM

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:21pm

But how? To whom? The black vote? He had them.

I'm unclear what you think was pandering. Waiting to denounce him or denouncing him altogether. Because THAT I get. He had to, to not lose any more white votes.

But you're talking to someone who was neither surprised nor shocked by Reverend Wright's comments. I was not offended in the least. Because I don't think racism against whites is in any way comparable to racism against blacks.

[Luscious]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:25pm

"You should be asking how to win over that avid Hillary supporter."

"How do you think Obama can do that, Luscious? The ball's in the court of the Obama campaign."

That depends on why said avid Hillary supporter is so set against voting for him should he win the nomination. That's what I've been asking since page 2 of this thread, and I still haven't gotten a clear and straight answer.

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 03:25 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:26pm

What matters is that Hillary Clinton herself seems to be trying to make the case that Obama is unelectable. This isn't healthy for a Democratic party that wants to win in November.

That's another useless and untrue narrative that you have to get beyond.

First of all, it's NOT what she's doing.

Second of all, it IS healthy for the Democratic Party. INCREDIBLY healthy!

The unprecedented passion, the continued attention--and, yes, the DRAMA--have revved up more interest in the Democratic race than ever before: more registrations, more turnout, more participation, more money.

But you have to STOP spending your heart and soul demonizing her and use that energy to help him win over the voters he needs to tip the Electoral College.

And Robbie--poor Kelli doesn't have a chance. I'm forming a 527 to destroy her character in the minds and hearts of the Tony voters. By the time my anti-Kelli O'Hara commercials have aired, she won't be as corny as Kansas in August anymore, and the Goddess LuPone will be asking "Corn? When did I eat corn?"

[madbrian]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:31pm

PJ - how do you think Obama needs to reach out to Clinton supporters? The most logical choice is the VP slot, and he doesn't necessarily have to put her on the ticket to do so. It might help to choose Strickland (Gov - Ohio), a Clinton supporter in a key state. It might also help to choose a woman other than Clinton, like Kathleen Sebelius (Gov - Kansas), who has ties to Ohio (her father was Gov) and Michigan (she grew up there).

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:35pm

Yes, we've got the attention. Voter registration is up. It's been great (and not so great) SO FAR. But at the same time she's driving a very real stake between voters Obama once had, way back when in Iowa, and the Obama candidacy, and she's driving it further and further every day. It IS true. You've been pointing it out over and over.

Hillary has every right to stay in it as long as she likes but she will not go unchallenged. It's crucial that we challenge the idea of her staying in the race. We have to ask why, what her intentions are, and we have to make it perfectly clear that if Obama finally reaches that magic number Hillary MUST stand by the Democratic party and the ultimate choice of the people.

My point is that if it comes to it, Hillary had better be willing to work to get her voters to vote Obama. If she truly believes anything she's ever said. She's either got to stop undermining him or be willing to work with him. Do I believe she will? I do.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:37pm

I dunno, but Sibelius's State of the Union disaster disqualifies her.

Frankly, I think he has to do a whistle-stop tour of all the red areas in this map, listening to lunch-bucket, working-class Democrats and Republicans, creating the kind of rapport with them that Hillary did. If she could, he can



The red went for Hillary, the blue for Obama, the green for Edwards.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:42pm

Well...if PJ can decide that certain questions are 'wrong' or what have you, I'd like to make a request of the Clinton supporters?

Stop using the phrase 'he has to work hard to...', because:

A. When has his campaign not worked hard? How do you think he got where he is?; and

B. It just kinda reeks of the 'lazy black boy' thing. I mean...I KNOW you don't mean it in any sort of racist terms. But, as we've learned during the course of this campaign, words can be taken badly.

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:46pm

Point A... fine. That's okay.

Point B... get the fug outta here.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:48pm

Oh please...if asking why Hillary supporters would switch to McCain is the 'wrong question', I think my request is perfectly harmless.

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:49pm

I never said it was the "wrong question".

I am VERY interested why ANYONE would vote for McCain. Anyone. At all.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:49pm

The "lazy black boy" thing was perpetuated every time an Obama supporter referred to Hillary as "calculating" or how she'd "stop at nothing" to win. It gives the impression of a shiftless Bammy sleeping in the sun.

As for the Wright stuff (you got it!), I wasn't offended by his comments either, but I also wasn't offended by Hillary's comments.

He waited to denounce him so as not to lose black votes, at least that's the way I saw it. That was the pandering.

Because I don't think racism against whites is in any way comparable to racism against blacks.

I also agree, but this race (heh) has started to make the waters a little murky. Do I think the first viable African-American candidate suddenly erases hundreds of years of oppression? Absolutely not. Do I still think the United States will be a deeply racist country even if Obama wins? I do.

That said, I fear I'm starting to tread on dangerous ground, and the last thing I want is for my comments to be misinterpreted (not that anyone has, but I'm just sayin...). I dunno. This whole primary has made my hurt. I know, join the club, right?

Updated On: 5/13/08 at 03:49 PM

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:51pm

I think people have too much damn time on their hands.

That's what I think. Who's with me?

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:55pm

Oh...I don't disagree with anything you're saying, Phyllis. We just have different views on the different things the candidates have said and done. And maybe it just comes down to our individual preferences more than any sort of 'truth'.

But I have to say, today, I'm loving the whole primary! Why? Because the reconciliation (sp??) during the summer and at the Convention will be so heartwarming that STEEL MAGNOLIAS is going to look like SLAUGHTERHOUSE 5.

Conversely, with Barr entering as the Libertarian candidate and Ron Paul causing a rucus, the Republican bloodletting will be starting just about the same time our wounds are healing.

It's the thing I appreciate most. Timing.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:56pm

I have never EVER said anything about a "lazy black boy," but I do admit to wondering if it's true what they say about men who wear size-13s...

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:57pm

RobbieJ: We can unite on that, my friend.

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:58pm

Does Obama wear size 13 shoes?!?

(I still believe it's the size of your middle finger to the bottom of your palm that is a better indication.) Updated On: 5/13/08 at 03:58 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:58pm

Correction: 13 and 1/2

[Namaste]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 3:59pm

Say 14. Every guy rounds up anyway.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/13/08 at 4:24pm

The polls quoted above represent the popular vote. Its the electoral vote that matters in November.

That's why I say there is work to do. Its not a subconcious bit of racism or disregard of the hard work already done. I'd be saying the same thing if the candidates were reversed.

So can we please drop the idea that any discouraging comments about obama must be subtextually racist?