<p>Well, some Obama supporters would not be making the same arguments they’ve been making if some Hillary supporters did not also make the same arguments they’ve been making. </p>
<p>I don’t know that there are many CC posters who like the rules as they are–I certainly don’t–but them’s are the rules that all candidates accepted going in. I hope that once the elections are over, a serious debate about changing them will occur. But it’s not done to change them in the middle of a campaign .</p>
<p>I, for one, do not think that those who supported Hillary did so out of racism. Some might have, but not the great majority of her supporters. I don’t feel responsible for what other posters post and certainly not for what anyone else but I think and write. So, I won’t take on the responsibility for “Your White is Showing” and other such comments.</p>
<p>But Woodwork is right that there seems to be more antipathy expressed toward the other Democratic candidate than toward the Republican one. And that is something that continues to puzzle me.</p>
<p>Hindoo, it is the nature of all elections to be contentious.</p>
<p>The difference here, to my mind, is that this one afforded the “victims” --and here everyone seems to fancy themselves an actual victim-- the luxury of dressing up their otherwise mundane, self-righteous and self-serving accusations against their opponents with the dreaded accusations of “racism” and “sexism.”</p>
<p>In so doing, they believe their hatred to be vindicated by the noxious accusations of racism and sexism; and more than anything else they need their hatred to be justified to remain a good person with good intentions…to be taken seriously in the debate. </p>
<p>After all, who can be expected to make nice with a racist…or a sexist?</p>
<p>Remove this dim-witted and hateful rhetoric from the on-going proceedings and the whole thing comes to a neat and tidy conclusion.</p>
<p>Alwaysamom, beyond the election --and there will be a “beyond the election”-- this rigmarole of unfounded hatred will, I fear, poison the well of American politics. This election could be a fresh start that would be good for ALL Americans. And maybe not.</p>
<p>People are bashing Hillary supporters, or “supporters” as one poster referred to them, because they don’t care for the fact that they just may not come back to the fold. Last night the major political story on television was- where will the white male and suburban women Democratic votes go? The “base” is now located far to the left of center. Remember how “amnesty, abortion and acid” knocked out McGovern? That was child’s play compared to the way Obama is going to be painted by the Republicans. I wonder if the guy even has a clue what is to come. And btw, they’d do the same thing if he were white, or even a veteran, just like McGovern. I’ve also detected that the media has begun to turn <em>ever so slightly</em> against BO,the same media which has bolstered him all this time. He’s not going to like that either.</p>
<p>I don’t know to whom “people” is supposed to apply. I am puzzled as to why those who supported Hillary will not come back to the fold. I really don’t understand why there is the perception that the base is located far to the left of center. BO’s health care plan, for example, is more “centrist” than HRC’s. this is the major difference between BO’s and HRC’s policies.</p>
<p>In theory, the vast similarities between BO and HRC ought to have made it easier for supporters of one to migrate to the other’s camp once the primaries were over. In practice, this means that the campaigns have had to emphasize personalities over policies, and thus magnified the importance of identity politics. It’s making it hard for the two sides to merge. But I’m hopeful that over the next couple of months, bad feelings will dissipate.</p>
<p>This time last year Hillary’s campaign was practically already ordering a set of moving trucks for January 2009… then they went out and lost the primary. I think a lot of her supporters are just still a bit shell-shocked at how her campaign fell apart.</p>
<p>I’m simply dumbfounded whenever I hear Hillary supporters say they’ll now vote for McCain in November. On what basis, please? Are political issues of no importance at all to them? Clinton and McCain are polar opposites in so many ways, from a woman’s right to choose, to getting out of Iraq. Clinton and Obama were, by their own admission, very much on the same page politically. For a Hillary supporter to vote Republican this fall would be akin to cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face. It makes absolutely no sense. They’re voting on personality rather than what’s truly important–issues. (Or could it be that they really don’t care about issues?) The same would be true if a Huckabee supporter said, “OK, my guy didn’t win, so I’ll vote for Obama instead of McCain.” Just as nuts. … </p>
<p>Though I leaned toward Obama from the outset, it was a pragmatic decision. Because of the irrational hatred so many seem to have had for Clinton since her days as First Lady, I thought Obama would ultimately be the more electable. But, if things had turned out differently, I would have climbed aboard the Hillary bandwagon in a New York minute and have done whatever it took to get her elected. I know who represents my positions … and I know who doesn’t.</p>
<p>“Remember how “amnesty, abortion and acid” knocked out McGovern? That was child’s play compared to the way Obama is going to be painted by the Republicans. I wonder if the guy even has a clue what is to come.”</p>
<p>You are so right, Ilsa! The Republican slime machine will make the recently concluded war between Clinton and Obama look like a friendly game of tiddley-winks. The Rove playbook on how to win a campaign has become the gold standard for concocting pure fabricated filth and venom, then dragging the opposing candidate through it. McCain himself was the recipient of this treatment back in 2000–recall how on the eve of the South Carolina primary, the Bush folks put it out there that he may have fathered an illegitimate biracial child? They didn’t say he did, they didn’t say he didn’t. Just might have. Of course, it was a lie–the child had been adopted by Cindy from Cambodia–but it stopped his campaign dead in its tracks. (Yes, racism is alive and well in America. Look up the revolting “Call me, Harold” ads used successfully against Tennessee congressman Harold Ford Jr. in '06.) </p>
<p>Even this past year, representatives of one of the other Republican candidates made a tentative effort to “swift-boat” McCain, by suggesting that maybe he hadn’t been so “heroic” after all during his days as a POW. This was so completely obscene, it quickly disappeared. John Kerry wasn’t so lucky in 2004. … </p>
<p>But Obama’s a smart man, Ilsa. I think he knows full well what’s heading his way.</p>
<p>“They’re voting on personality rather than what’s truly important - issues.” </p>
<p>Indeed, the only reason Obama came to the forefront is his “personality,” and his “background.” How could he otherwise have risen to prominence based on “issues” and his record of accomplishment? He has none! If anyone is to be accused of voting “personality,” it’s BO supporters. </p>
<p>Otherwise it would have been Biden, hands down. I mean, come on now.</p>
<p>The “issue” people keep bypassing is experience. Why is that, I wonder?</p>
<p>But Biden and Obama were at least “similar” in terms of their “stances.” I never said that “personality” had no place whatsoever in making a candidate selection, but that “issues” important to you should hold more weight for anyone with more than a single-digit IQ. Thus, picking Obama on personality preference over Biden, Clinton, or whoever, was not really so weird, because they all for the most part stood on the same side of the political spectrum. … As for experience, McCain certainly has it–but I’m not impressed by it. While he’s had some admirable “maverick” moments over the years, voting 95% in lock-step with GWBush these past few years? Not impressive. Voting against key issues near and dear to my heart? Not the kind of “experience” I’m looking for. …</p>
<p>Hindoo–some people are very concerned about Obama’s lack of experience in foreign policy. Trust me. That is THE issue for many. They called the female of this type “security moms” in past elections, I believe. They are still around. This round they’re calling them “suburban women.”</p>
<p>Well, actually, I have trouble understanding the Hillary supporters who prefer McCain over Obama since, I have posted, HRC and Obama are very similar on the issues, and the main difference between then is over health care in which Obama is more centrist (and thus a tad closer to McCain than Hillary).</p>
<p>I agree that personality and character must play a role. But does McCain’s experience/character trump policy differences for those who supported Hillary? Let us consider the latest SCOTUS ruling which was 5-4. Several of the current Justices are over 70. Stevens is 88 and Ginsberg, 75, has suffered ill-health. That is an important consideration.</p>
<p>On foreign policy, Obama is taking on several Clinton advisors (including Albright). </p>
<p>I read an interesting piece analyzing the generational gap between the Obama and Clinton advisors on foreign policy; the latter are described as more attuned to the Cold War world and sovereign states and the former as being more post-Cold War and focused on the dangers posed by failed states, the issues raised by globalization, etc…</p>
<p>On the economy, Obama is said to have taken on Robert Rubin and Larry Summers.
I don’t see a cause for alarm. Oh, and Colin Powell is hinting that he might support Obama; he considers him as qualified to be president as McCain.</p>
<p>You’re right, Ilsa. I know a “security mom,” or two. Still, McCain’s foreign policy stance these days, when it comes to Iraq, scares ME. I don’t believe we should ever have invaded Iraq in the first place and McCain’s hawkish statements about staying there until we “win,” whatever that means, terrifies me. I think this Iraq debacle has probably increased a thousand-fold the number of would-be terrorists and people who hate our swaggering arrogance, and has made the world a much more dangerous place for Americans.</p>
<p>So… were those “security Moms” equally “concerned” about GW Bush in 2000? Because he had less “foreign policy” experience than Obama. None at all, actually. So I guess those “security Moms” rushed to vote for Gore, given his extensive experience in the Executive Branch as well as the Senate. Correct, Ilsa? That how you voted then? Along with all the other “security Moms?”</p>
<p>McCain has a lot of foreign policy experience, Rumsfeld has a lot of foreign policy experience, Cheney has a lot of foreign policy experience. </p>
<p>Ultimately it’s not ‘experience’ that people care about, it’s their record. On that front, McCain is unavoidable linked to the Bush regime and what will probably be seen as one of, if not the, biggest foreign policy blunders in US history. </p>
<p>Obama opposed the war from the beginning, recognizing it for exactly what it is… a foreign policy disaster. </p>
<p>McCain has done nothing but flip-flopped. First he said we’d go in and be recognized as liberators (oops), then he said we’d be in and out quite quickly, then he said we could be there for 100 years, then he said we’d be out in 5-6 years, now he’s saying we should keep troops there for decades and just this week he said that when we bring the troops home “doesn’t matter.”</p>
<p>On other important issues, McCain’s policies are a joke compared to Clinton. For one, his healthcare plan is utter nonsense. </p>
<p>Any voter that truly supported Clinton for her policies would have a real hard time explaining how they suddenly still strongly support those causes, but have now turned into a Republican supporting McCain.</p>
![http://bigheaddc.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mccain-sisters.jpg[/url]](http://bigheaddc.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mccain-sisters.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/27/us/27mccain-450.jpg[/url]](http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/27/us/27mccain-450.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
