Reply #64: Seriously? Because she's way better than a Republican, and is looking strong. [View All]

[LoZoccolo]

Outsourcing is one of my pet issues as I work in a technology field, so obviously I don't like that aspect of her candidacy. I'm even more ticked at her for claiming she could be a Senator in Punjab; it proudly shows a lack of loyalty towards her constituency.

But there is much more at stake than just that issue. And there is also the thing which I tell other people that I feel I have to follow myself: if I really want action on the issue, I'm going to have to get other voters to take it seriously before I can expect a politician too. The hot-button wedge issues that the Republicans use to divide us and to gain votes are all things that the voters themselves already have strong opinions on; they know how to use this. Within the Democratic Party, there is already a strong base of support for reproductive issues and a growing one for same-sex unions, and our Democratic candidates cannot ignore these issues. But it's difficult to expect that they all fall in line with one position on a particular issue until all the groundwork has been laid for a base of support that they can no longer ignore. I tell this to other people all the time regarding NAFTA and a few other issues on which I'm lukewarm, so I realize I need to follow it myself.

You and I and anyone here are more likely to get what we want appealing to their self-interest by delivering the votes, or an issue that is much more a sure winner having been established that way amongst the electorate, than by begging them to act favorably toward us. Even worse is the act of threatening, because not only do the profoundly disempowered people who take that tactic fail to offer anything positive to the candidates, they also don't establish that anything will come of satisfying them: they could find another issue to threaten over.