My qualms about the "Movement" for Obama.

[Tom Rinaldo]

I have had many discussions on DU with people who say Barack Obama will best be positioned to overcome vested interest opposition to progressive changes, because when he reaches out to the other side seeking common ground he will not be doing it by himself; he has "a movement" backing him up. I have seen endless posts here stressing how Obama says "we" but Hillary says "I", when talking about trying to accomplish political goals. The argument presented seems to hold that the movement behind Obama will insist on good faith attempts to find new common ground in solving America's problems, because "the people" will punish politicians - obstructionist Republicans mostly, who try to stick to narrow partisanship.

I can only judge the strength and character of "the movement" backing Obama by what I see from the outside I admit. To date however I have higher regards for Barack Obama than I do for his "movement", though I do see real positives in his movement also. A movement that starts by engaging new people to become active, that inspires people, that puts people into political motion for the first time, begins with a lot of pluses in my book.

But if the Obama "movement" tolerates, and allows to prosper within it, as much thinly veiled online hatred for a Democrat as it obviously does who, give or take a few percentage points, has the support of half the Democrats in the nation, then I am not inspired by it's ability to assist Obama realize his goals if elected. I am far from convinced that movement will help Barack Obama to put aside America's divisive politics of the past in the way he so proudly proclaims he is best able to accomplish.

It is not that difficult for a zealous movement to over play it's hand and become counter productive - pushing away those who are not already part of it more than it draws new people into it. There are many reports, for example, that indicate that an invasion of orange hatted Dean supporters swarming over Iowa on his behalf prior to the 2004 caucus there hurt Dean more than it helped him, because too many locals became alienated because of it. There is no doubt that Howard Dean would never have come as close as he did to realizing his Presidential goal in 2004 without the strong support of grassroots activists. That does not mean however that all of their behavior was net positive for him.

You are right if you assume that I believe most of the hate shown by many toward Hillary is unfair, and I credit much of it, at least indirectly, to Hillary's long years of standing in the way of a Right wing agenda for America - the Reagan/Bush agenda, that the election of Bill Clinton as President in 1992 interrupted. It provided a template of lies that those who want to push Clinton out of Obama's way now are free to draw on and copy from. I do not accept that the hatred comes from her vote for the IWR or her so called Senate record of appeasement.

John Kerry, Joe Biden, and Chris Dodd supported the IWR also. John Edwards co-sponsored it and openly defended the actual Iraq invasion for months after the fact. Edwards and others now say they were misled then and that they are sorry now. Clinton said she would not vote the same way then if she knew then what she knows now. Some people put more weight on hearing the words "I'm sorry" in this context than I do, but OK, call that a reason not to support her. It isn't a reason to hold her uniquely in such deep disdain, nor does Clinton's liberal voting record in the U.S. Senate qualify her for such disdain. If Hillary Clinton is our enemy, what the hell does the Obama movement expect to find when Barack Obama reaches across the aisle for that unity embrace?

If Obama's movement is alienating support from Democrats who think highly of Hillary Clinton as a fighter for the Democratic Party, while they signal their intentions (see - I just felt "intimidated" from using the common phrase "telegraph their intentions" because of the derision the term "xerox" has gotten around here) to reach out for the support needed to bring about progressive changes - don't mind me if I'm not buying that as a strategy.

There are many many exceptions to the negative behavior I speak of inside of Obama's movement, only a small minority actively engage in it. And I realize that the problem I am raising appears in its most concentrated form in online expression, and even there most Obama supporters are not a party to it. But those who are party to it are often praised and held in high esteem by other Obama supporters precisely for their zest in fighting against Clinton for Obama, and seldom get called out for sowing disunity in our own Party. If there is an Obama movement then Obama must be considered at it's head. He isn't the leader of our Party yet let alone our nation, but he is the leader of his movement. To an extent, I do judge Obama's leadership abilities now by taking the measure of the movement that he now already leads. The results I find are highly erratic.

[Maddy McCall]

1. Tom...

you and I have followed much the same path to our support of Hillary. We also share the same skepticism.

Thanks for posting. Thanks for being an example for supporters of candidates from both sides--that we can express our concerns without the hyperbole.

K/R

[jasmine621]

40. I second that.

Tom, you express the sentiments that I cannot put into words. It's like you have been inside my mind and my heart. Thank You!

[underpants]

2. I'm just glad people don't copycat thread titles like the do in the Lounge

:evilgrin:

[DS1]

3. This thread leaves an unpleasant taste in my mouth

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. Spit it out. n/t

[aquart]

190. Nonsense. Truth is delicious.

[Mags]

5. Well said

[AlCzervik]

6. one the worst yet funniest thread titles ever in this forum.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. OK OK, I edited the title, lol n/t

[underpants]

9. Yeah

MUCH better

[JuniperLea]

8. Yes...

Well stated. The most fatal flaw is, as you stated, the alienating of support. Yet when that is brought up, even more trash is thrown.

Kool-Aid comes in many flavors...

[NastyRiffraff]

10. Excellent, thoughtful post

I realize that Obama (or any other candidate) can't completely control supporters. And yes much if not most of the vitrol we see against Clinton occurs online. His statements about respect for Hillary are a good step, but he needs to at least try to rein in some of his supporters.

Obama can't address each and every supporter, nor should he try. But he could make it clear, on his website, through emails, conference calls and the many other venues he has available that a) he respects the other candidate and that she has a perfect right to stay in the race; and b) that disagreement on issues is acceptable, spurious and vicious attacks on integrity are not.

BTW, that goes for Hillary, too, although the attacks against her, including demands to quit the race "for the good of the party" are particularly vile right now.

[ginnyinWI]

174. I think it's just the anonymous nature of online posting.

Probably most of the crazy posters here would never dare to be so rude or outspoken in real life. But here they can hide and take nasty shots at people. It's human. And it's not nice or productive--but there it is.

There are plenty of us Obama supporters who don't do it, as you know,and there are both kinds of Hillary Clinton supporters here, too. I mainly avoid threads that look like they are nothing more than food fights. I use Ignore and Hide Thread, too. I come here to discuss ideas and compare notes about things we see in the media and witness in person. It's a great way to find people who are just as obsessed with politics as I am. :)

[ProSense]

11. "If Obama's movement is alienating support from Democrats who think highly of Hillary Clinton"

Are you serious? Do you really believe Democrats are being alienated by Obama's campaign as opposed to Hilary's actions and more?

The OP is nothing but spin!

[Tom Rinaldo]

Obama's supporters are no more alienated by Obama's campaign that

Clinton's supporters are by hers. Our party is closely split between them and undecideds are decidedly in the minority, though obviously are a very important minority right now. How they swing may determin the nomination battle, but there are divided loyalities on our Party regardless. Not everyone is seeing this election race through your eyes.

[ProSense]

21. "Not everyone is seeing this election race through your eyes." Right, the other eyes belong to

Hillary supporters, including you. There will eventually be a Democratic nominee and I suspect the "split between them" will eventually close.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. I am continually making efforts in support of that day n/t

[aquart]

188. Really? How?

We give up, give in, just do what we're told? Does that seem familiar? Does that sound to you anything like the seven years we've just been through? Because it does to me. Right down to the superior sneer.

[hfojvt]

61. apparently Clinton supporters are being alienated HERE - at DU

How do you expect Obama to stop that? Should he appoint an official representative to monitor DU and Kos and to chide his supposed supporters when they commit excesses? Should he divide his campaign time somehow between campaigning for himself and defending Hillary from the press and the blogosphere?

Secondly, what kind of criticism can we ABCers at DU level at Hillary which won't alienate or offend Hillary supporters? Do we, you and I, Hillary supporter and Hillary opponent, agree on progressive principles? Is there then any way I can show you that Hillary does not support them, or you can show me that Hillary does? That's all I try to do. If a DUer posts a thread saying "I support Hillary for these reasons - A, B, and C." then I try to debate the merits of that.

Is that offensive? It seems to provoke no discussion, nor to change any minds. Do we all come to this discussion board with the philosophy that "my mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts or logic"?

[Tom Rinaldo]

69. You know what prompted me to write this?

A DU thread (since locked) with the OP title: "O.K., I'll Admit It. I Hate Hillary Clinton". It got 18 Recommends in less than an hour before it got locked.

This isn't a hateful thread I posted. I essentially said nothing negative against Obama, I said mixed things about Obama supporters while saying most were positive, and I acknowledged important positive aspects of the movement behind Obama.

I never take offense at the type of threads you describe that challenge Clinton on issues.

[ZinZen]

71. Well, those threads are wrong

and there are flagrant abusers on both sides of each candidates. I remember the rancor in 04 when I was for Dean and you for Clark. Same kind of poo was being flung by the extremists but it was short lived because the nomination was sewn up quickly for Kerry. I remember those saying they would NEVER vote for Kerry, but after settling down and getting their emotions in check, I think most did when they saw the other option was Bush.

I think if Obama wins and the dust settles people will be able to see the contrasts between Obama and McCain without a problem. I would hope so anyways. I know I would vote Hillary over McCain in a heartbeat.

[Tom Rinaldo]

80. We share the same hopes and I will gladly work for Obama if he wins the nomination

I do take some hope from how we came back together in 2004, but it feels even worse this year. Still there are many bridge builders left on both "sides".

[hfojvt]

99. that was a thread that I R'd as well

it was honest and it explained some of the REASONS for this hatred. From the start I have been ABC. If this was Obama vs. Biden I probably would be neutral. If it was Biden vs. Hillary, I would be strongly for Biden. I joke that I am an HHHer. A Hugh Hillary Hater, but I try to be fair about it. I don't hate everything she says or does.

From the beginning of this campaign, Hillary has seemed like the big-money candidate who was not progressive and was not taking stands on the issues, just collecting and bragging about her endorsements and her inevitability.

We hate the DLC. Always have. So I do not think it is honest to say that we hate Hillary because of the rightwing media. It's not the rightwing media which is upset about the IWR or NAFTA or DINOS.

[Tom Rinaldo]

102. Well there was a history behind that thread also

I wasn't trying to summarize all of it - but the OP author had been on a real tear accusing Clinton of attempting to profit politically from the death of that motorcycle officer today = and that was the mildest of the vile s/he was posting on that matter.

You identify with the word "hate" for your feelings toward Hillary but you are not conducting yourself in a hatefull manner here I don't think, at least not on this thread anyway :)

But even if I take your check list at face value, there is still a pervasive double standard at play against Clinton. It was Hillary Clinton who Carl Bernstein (by NO means a shill for Hillary) who made arguments against NAFTA to Bill Clinton when Bill was President and wrestling with the issue, and it was Al Gore who went onto national TV and defended NAFTA in a one on one debate with Ross Perot. No one ever rags on Al Gore about NAFTA, and Obama recently scrubbed all of his free trade policies off of his web site but hardly anyone ever rags against Obama about those. There are literally dozens of Democratic Senators with far more conservative voting records than Hillary Clinton. Birch Bayh is one of them and he was being pushed for President very seriously about two years ago. He was putting aside a huge war chest, he was hiring top political operatives, but at the time many at DU were ragging on Hillary constantly but barely saying a word against Bayh who at that point was ranked as high as third most likely to win the Democratic nomination.

Those are just some quick examples.

[Bongo Prophet]

128. POI: Birch Bayh died a long time ago. you mean Evan, surely. I would not support him.

I would have a great interest in Birch, but not Evan, and would far prefer Senator Clinton.
Many others might as well, who are being called Hillary Haters. This would indicate a policy difference, rather than some irrational hatred, as the reason for choosing one over the other.
Some would LOVE a Boxer instead of a Clinton, and this would imply policy difference, and not sexism, as has been charged against those who do not support Hillary.

Gore did indeed argue for NAFTA, and his DLC centrist aspects outweighed his progressive/visionary aspects, much to my dismay, and much to his in 2000. The blame could be placed on bad advisors, same as with Hillary. The Al gore post 2000 is a different matter, as he came out strongly against the Iraq war, against wiretapping, etc, and showed himself to be at heart, a true populist progressive. This at a time that we needed it most, before it was politically safe to do so. At a time when Bill was firmly on the Bushes side. THAT is a big reason why he is embraced by progressives today, not because of some arbitrary fashion choice. I think Hillary could still get more progressive support, if she so chooses - at least to some degree - by following through on promises for health care and green jobs and all the reast, and that might begin to heal some of the mistrust. I hope we get a chance to see that, either as president or in the Senate.

I was here in 2003, and the IWR votes by Kerry, Edwards, et al were under constant attack by Dean supporters, and Clark supporters. It was nasty. However, I never called Dean supporters cultists, and indeed was very polite to them even as I supported Kerry.

No one to my knowledge ever dismissed them as "haters" either, like the Bush worshippers dismissed all critics of Bush policy. Indeed, I and other supporters of many candidates defended him against the "scream" nonsense, and when the 50 state strategy was proposed, I thought it an excellent long term strategy. I support him in that, and as DNC head - still do.

It is not that this "movement" is so irrational in an organic sense, but it has been dismissed as such, not only by overzealous supporters, but by Clinton campaign itself, and through press releases, etc. This really fed the fire, as they were called cultists, dismissed because they were too young, implying they were naive and stupid, and so on.

Their reaction in turn was to lash out at the older generation, to denigrate their value, their education, and so on. Some will argue which came first, nyah nyah. It is hard to determine.
Somebody has to decide NOT to go the childish route, and that is the responsibility of the older generation to do so, and to show the newer voters how to disagree without being so disagreeable - and finally, to show BY EXAMPLE how to practice politics in a reasonable and mature way.

In my opinion, the older generation, of which I am a part, failed miserably at this.
When Sen. Clinton was thought to be "inevitable" - and that was being pushed here, the supporters said the entire "progressive" wing was not even needed for victory. Such hubris did not bode well, and I called them on that. I was told how much "it sucked to be me"- and dismissed out of hand.
Now that the tables are turning, the ones who were once so dismissive are now such victims. Wailing about how unfair it is.

In spite of defending Clark, RFK Jr and others on one side, and Kerry, Teddy and others on the other side - each group has people who only see the attacks as unilateral. Each side has a giant mote in their eye. When i tried to even encourage people to stop using the "bot" names and other childishness, I was told to get a thicker skin. Even gentle requests by those who are now so aggrieved were met with stony silence, at best, and insults at worst.

Both sides are guilty of craven hypocrisy and foolishness.
As I and others warned, the escalation has caused deep feelings of resentment that will NOT heal over in many cases. some of the best DUers have left, never to return. Some are so hardened by this that they will not phonebank or donate, etc - and when you lose an activist, you can lose dozens of votes.
If it were not so important to work together against our common enemy, I would say to hell with all of you who let the most trivial of matters be used for another salvo in an unending war of shit flinging. back and forth. They started it. no they did. DISGRACEFUL.

As it is, I will have to bite my tongue as some of the very worst assholes on this board go all self-righteous and dramatic, or shrug off their own behavior with apologies. This is the same thing the Bushies will do -at best! - for all the death and destruction their actions have caused.

Pardon me for the angry tone, Tom - it is not directed at you, but at the process of devolution that has happened here.
If you can be a part of the healing process, goo for you. If I am here and see you needing some help, I will offer it. I have years of experience as an even handed scold, as you can tell.
Everybody can hate me equally! :)

[Bongo Prophet]

135. I need to correct this: Birch Bayh is still kicking. Hooray! He is a good one.

I had to look him up, as I remember him fondly - don't know why i thought he died some time ago.
Oy, glad I was wrong on that - wish he would kick some sense into his son, though! ;)

[Tom Rinaldo]

144. I'm glad you were wrong on that also, and thanks for correcting my mindless mistake

Of course I mean to write Evan Bayh in my post above. At my age I should well remember that the son is not a xerox (heh) of his father.

[Bongo Prophet]

180. I wish he was, though. Even a mimeograph would be acceptable. Or a lithograph.

Instead of a warped silly putty peeloff.
;)

[Tom Rinaldo]

184. I just want to say that I really liked this post - I meant to reply earlier

There is a lot of good food for thought within it. I know I was walking a tight rope with this OP, because the movement behind Obama has been attacked unfairly in many ways - and so it is difficult to find fair words to use to express some sincere reservations without reenforcing some malicious attacks that have been made on many of Obama's enthusiastic supporters.

You covered a lot of ground. I agree with you, since a so called advantage of age is experience that can help lead to deeper understandings, that older online activists do bear a special burden to show how sincere and passionate political differences can be debated in a manner that sheds light on rather than throwing smoke over matters that potentially divide us; that keeps strong bridges open between ultimate allies rather than burning those bridges down.

And I agree with you that the way for Hillary to reestablish some greater credability in the progressive community would be for her to step out and strongly fight for core democratic values. Because so much of the public debate has centered on finding common ground across partisan lines, there is any opening now for her to establish through words AND deeds that she will fight for our core beliefs in any future "negotiations". The debate over Universal Health Care offers her one opportunity to do so.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

105. You can't say much around here without people jumping all over you - no matter how sincere

you are.

[AtomicKitten]

16. the genesis of the "alienation" is exactly as you have outlined

I suppose it's easier to blame extraneous influences to save face in what is becoming a crushing defeat.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. I Hear This Sentiment From The Fans Of Winning Sports Teams

Unless you are part of the nucleus of his campaign his success is no more yours than the Giants' success was mine because I rooted for them to win the Super Bowl...

Am I a better person because the Giants won?

[flyarm]

137. yes i am feeling totally alienated by the Obama supporters and his entire camp!

i am to the stage of going and re-registering as an independant...i am a 56 yr lifelong dem who no longer recognizes my party. and what i see truely bothers me to the core.

and no..i am not a Hillary fan..but you obama people have made me look in her direction..which i would never have thought possible...mission accomplished for you obama people..you have alienated many life long Dem's....i hear the same from many many dems i have worked with for many many years in the dem party.

fly

[Eurobabe]

156. Change is hard

at any age.

[flyarm]

167. it is not change...if rudeness and irresponsibility is the change you are talking about

then yes this change will be not only hard but devistating..and if you think obama is a dem..i have a bridge for you!

[Eurobabe]

178. Obama is not a Democrat? Curious, why do you say that?

What made you come to that conclusion?

[CatnHat]

183. Definitely

Yes. There has always been the "fringe" supporters. But this time around, the "fringe" has outnumbered the base; that's where I differ from the original post. Other than that, in all the years I have been involved in political process, I have never seen such "hatred" and vile behavior coming from inside the party. You might call it counter-productive or over zealous, but not only does Obama and his supporters lack substance; they just don't care about the democratic process, what it stands for, shows little or no interest in issues, or show any respect for the other candidate.

Politics is a dirty game, but in the end, the democratic party looses. Obama supporters claim "everything" is Clinton's fault from the war, to poverty, to education, to the economy. Yeah, no allegiance at all to what the democratic really represents, rather they focus "style" rather than "substance". This is not about Obama, this is about our country. My inspiration comes from a higher source, not a "political" candidate or his supporters, who are not only vague, smug, avoids the issues, but downright ridicules Hillary and her supporters; that is not what democrats do; usually that kind of malicious behavior is displayed in the GE; not primaries.

To the Obama supporters, is it really a good idea to piss off a "base" that Obama will definitely need? I am done with the ridiculous threads about Hillary and Bill Clinton; and there are many that feel like I do. Go to any board, here and outside the DU and start reading. Obama may be chipping away at some of Hillary's base, but believe me, he is also loosing alot of that same base. By the way, Hillary is a smart, intelligent woman, and who would make a great president. Spin that.

[Akimbo2112]

210. Actually, they are alienating more than a few...

when their enthusiasm turns negative in the face of scrutiny. That's a major drawback to highly emotive campaign techniques. When people get too personally and emotionally invested in a candidate, they sometimes begin to perceive even the most modest critique on policy as an affront to the dignity and character of their support base and, ultimately their candidate.

Here in Deep South Texas, Obama supporters from Austin and San Antonio have descended upon our community. They aren't so much asking for our support as assuming we feel exactly the same as they do. When many express reservations, they tend to get abusive, even hurling charges of racism around very lightly (in a minority of cases).

Since it looks like he's all but got it wrapped up, his group of supporters might do well to take the vitriol for fellow democrats down a notch. Especially since Nader just threw his hat in and could siphon off disaffected Hillary supporters from the party. The way it's going right now, the numbers of disaffected are growing by the day.

[judaspriestess]

12. Its the meta-message that leaves me deeply concerned

and the meta-message is what is insighting this frenzy in people. Its a strange thing to see.

The heckler who got into an argument with Bill Clinton is a perfect example of it.

Comments of "you're likeable enough" really send a message of it's ok to hate you.

[anamandujano]

22. I agree, his campaign gives the signals. His so-called leadership

is lacking sorely in the uniting game, as OP suggested.

I would also suggest that the attacks here at DU are from more than a small percentage of his followers.

[flyarm]

168. i could not agree with you more! eom

[Bongo Prophet]

131. What does calling Obama supporters cultists or "unreal" get us? Is that a signal too?

If you read "you're likeable enough" as inciting hate, then what of those?

I agree, it is a strange thing to see.
Those who are too wrapped up
cannot even see it in themselves,
wouldn't you agree?


I don't know what the heckler/Clinton dialog was about, as I have not heard any audio or transcript.
Have you?

[yellowcanine]

13. There is no "movement". There is only strong support for Obama. That is all.

[Umbram]

14. You find what you look for.

The absolute WORST of human kind shows up on the internet.

Join a RL sports league, hell even a chess league - it doesn't matter. Observe what kind of decorum there is.

Next, do the equivalent online. "OMG, I pwn'd your Queen biaach!"

If one does the second but not the first, one can simply say "Wow - chess players are really rude people!" Add to that your bias, you didn't prefer chess to begin with. Where do you end up?

[f the letter]

176. Well said.. as the good Doctor Gonzo would say, it's

an atavistic endeavor in the behavioral sink.

[Prophet 451]

193. Seconded

I work online and I've seen this. People who normally wouldn't say "shit" if their mouth was full of it suddenly morph into Tourettes-suffering enfant terribles when you give them a modem. I think it's something to do with the anonymity.

[cali]

15. I appreciate your thoughts, Tom

Having said that, let me put down a few of mine. You recognize at the en of your post that most of the behavior you decry is online. All indications are that there is no parallel in the real world, where most dems are happy with both candidates. That's an important thing to keep in mind.

Yes, the entire thing about the xerox comment reached sublimely absurd heights. Yes, there's been some real hate expressed here for Clinton, and that's distressing. However, you fail to acknowledge that there's also been some real hate for Obama expressed on the part of Clinton supporters, and that plays into the dynamic of these online battles as well.

I don't see that there's a movement being created. There's no hard evidence of that. And I remain skeptical that one will emege, but I do think that having popular support gives a President tactical advantages, and that Obama knows this, and knows instinctively how to press those advantages. If he does get nominated and if does win with strong popular support, Obama will have a strong platform from which to push his agenda. Divisiveness isn't going to disappear, and I certainly don't think that Obama is naive enough to believe that it will.

I'm not sure what the source of the deep antipathy so many people feel for Clinton is. I think it's a complicated stew of factors that includes sexism, the inculcation of hate by the right wing, things the Clintons have actually done being conflated with things that they didn't do, a bush/clinton fatigue and more.

I know it's distressing to see the behavior of some Obama supporters, but I think you're conflating that with the vast majority of Obama supporters who don't dislike Clinton, but simply prefer him, and that's led you to blow things a bit out of proportion.

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. A really good post Cali, Thanks

I acknowledge that a lot of ugly things have been spoken against Obama online by supporters of other candidates also, even if in my experience more ugliness gets thrown at Clinton than at him - if for no other reason than the fact that he is less "disliked" in general and he has many more online supporters than Hillary Clinton has. Still that is a very fair point, a literal viscious circle tends to set in.

Perhaps I am mistaken but I honestly think I have seen TV coverage of at least one rally where Barack Obama himself referred to the wave of support behind him as a movement. I know I have frequently seen Obama supporters refer to themselves as a movement. And I have read the type of arguments presented from Obama supporters that I tried to summarize in my OP. That is one of two reasons why I singled out Obama supporters for this Journal only, I know you realize that I have defended both Obama and Obama supporters from some Clinton supporters on other threads from time to time.

The other reason why I chose this subject is precisely because Obama campaigns on the theme of putting divisive politics behind us. Not only is that not a Clinton theme, but Obama is not that subtle about sometimes linking the divisive politics of the past with the Clintons in specific.

Thank you for such a thoughtful response.

[Bluenorthwest]

159. A movement that started with McClurkin last October

A movement is not a candidate. Progressives don't engage in gay baiting and religionist wedge politicis.
The defining moment of the Obama campaign and probably the signal of my eventual departure from this Party. Minority Bashing is not something I will shrug off like the vast majority of this Party did, including those that should know better via personal experience.

Registered Democratic at age 18. This year I will likely go Independent. I don't hang with religionist bigots, no matter what the logo or the rhetoric of your candidates might be.

[PurityOfEssence]

17. The Pied Piper strikes again

Can't think why people characterize this campaign as a cult...

This and Senator Clinton's campaign have strayed on regular occasions into the land of privilege, the privilege of the downtrodden. Much mileage can be had from leftists with these appeals, since, as pluralists, we seek to redress inequalities and respect the pain of the disenfranchised.

Still, and this is an important point: one person's pain shouldn't trump that of others and give a blank check for a headlong run with irrational tactics.

Obama and his supporters don't have a corner on the virtue market as many claim, and the slash-and-burn methods of the zealots are grounded in false observations and extreme selfishness.

I have to run and will be out for the rest of the day, but I hope this thread gets the attention it warrants. Regardless of anything, if this guy becomes the nominee, his supporters have to clean up their collective, snotty and self-congratulatory act if it's not to blow up in our faces.

[femrap]

18. I have felt alienated by BO himself....

he spoke of the 'excesses of the '60's and '70's.' As if the Boomers went too far...too far with stopping the war? Too far by women because they demanded legal abortion and control over their personal freedom? He also said that it is time for that generation to step aside. WHAT? Are the Boomers to hop on the next floe and die quietly? One turns 50 and you need to get out of the way?

In addition, I don't think he likes women. Oh, they're OK as long as they abide by his rules. His voting of 'present' on Choice bothers me. And all I hear about his mother is her death. And there's that air of arrogance about him...his condescending attitude toward women.

And this 'Yes, We Can' annoys me. It is just so empty. All fluff. And I find his talk of 'UNITY' to be hypocritical as I see him alienate elders and women. He never mentions women issues..day care, Choice, insurance covering BC pills and their increasing cost...over a $1/day...the glass ceiling....you'd think he throw the 'little ladies' a bone or two, wouldn't ya?

I mean Blacks and women have faced much of the same discrimination. It seems that mentioning race is a huge taboo, but ridiculing older women is fun, hip!

I don't trust him. Under all of this 'unity,' I believe he is more republican lite than most think.

Hopefully, I have the nasty BO fans on Ignore by now.

[anamandujano]

27. Exactly, he could have spoken out about the sexist attacks on

Hillary in the MSM. He used it to his advantage, like his followers here. This is one reason why I'm not going to lift a finger to defend him when they turn.

He has done zip uniting except talk about it.

I think he's more republican middle-weight than most think.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

29. The pictures of him looking at Hillary with contempt and condencension bother me.

I hope it's just Hillary that he is so scornful of and not all women.

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. Obama has done well being gracious in person toward his opponent

in the debates since the State of the Union Address. I have been glad to see that. She has been also of course. It is healthy for our party to see that.

[anamandujano]

55. Of course they sat him down and explained things to him. It did

not come naturally. That much is obvious.

[femrap]

81. I get the feeling that he likes

them if they do as he sees fit. He certainly isn't a champion of women's causes.

[RandomKoolzip]

146. That's a FEELING. It has nothing to do with reality.

What if I said, "I get the feeling Hillary is actually a robot controlled by Al-Quaeda and I also get the feeling that she likes strawberry pop tarts more than blueberry ones." Would I be taken seriously? I mean, all you need is the "aura" of sexism to become a misogynist now? Do we all need to be equipped with special glasses to see what you see? Uh, I mean "feel what you feel?"

[unc70]

196. I see it sometimes in his actions, too.

Maybe it's not just towards women, but his body language towards others is not reassuring. The looking down in disdain, the testiness when challenged (Edwards got under his skin a couple of times in the debates), the acting like he is privileged.

The anger Michelle had (maybe still has) towards Barack because he was mostly absent from the home and not helping raise the children is still a problem for them.

[femrap]

200. He gives me a very distrusting feeling...nt.

[femrap]

199. Time will tell about my gut....it has

been 100% when it comes to estimating human character. I know you have no such feelings of intuition.

Answer me this: Why does Obama go around saying the poor people will relate to him because his grandmother in Africa is poor and doesn't even have running water? WHY THE FUCK DOESN'T HE SEND HER SOME FUCKING MONEY?

If he treats his grandmother this way, how do you think he'll treat the poor women in this country?

You, too, can be happy....have a couple ribs removed and the dog's life can be yours. World Peace, at long last.

I bet you haven't had a feeling since 2nd grade.

Ignore.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

50. i felt alienated too and his supporters speak the same language in cruder terms

[femrap]

83. Regarding Einstein.....

A long time ago I read that his wife was the one who came up with those great ideas...he stole them. They met in college. She became pregnant and that ended her career. I believe he later left/divorced her.

I need to google that and see if I can find it.

Unity...Shunity! No You Can't! lol. It's TGIF...excuse my silliness.

[lapfog_1]

136. here ya go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mileva_Mari%C4%87

Yup, he divorced her... after 16 years of marriage and a 20 year relationship.

As for her contributing to his work... there are many referenced articles here that debunk that theory.

One other fact.

Mileva Marić failed her Zurich Polytechnic teaching diploma examination, almost certainly because of her poor grade in mathematics.

[femrap]

198. Of course there are many references that debunk....

as a man, I would debunk them too.

I take wiki with an ocean of salt.

[angie_love]

114. if you think he is repub lite, then explain his pure liberal voting record in the senate?

Also I am a woman and I don't see anything sexist coming out of his mouth. He also has a STRONG senate voting record for womans rights. I am not black but I disagree with you that blacks and women have faced much of the same discrimination. After all women were not lynched/kept as slaves/segregated as blacks have been. Women do face discrimination but can you honestly say its at the same level as blacks? I would appreciate a thoughtful response from you b/c hopefully we can reason this out together as fellow democrats.

[femrap]

124. Women and Blacks have been

long-time political allies...going back to the days of working to get the vote. Did you know that when women were working to outlaw liquor, it was because their husbands were coming home drunk and beating them? They really didn't mind liquor...it's just that many males have a violent reaction to liquor.

And it wasn't too long ago that a woman could be beaten and raped by her husband and she just had to accept it. And it wasn't too long ago that employment want ads were listed under Male and Female. Have you ever read the statistics for rape...how often the rapist is caught and put in jail?

Did you know that in other countries women are paid for doing all the housework? The only thing that has kept middle class families afloat over the past 20 years is women going to work...of course there's the other unpaid job of dishes, cooking, laundry, vacuuming, changing beds, dusting, grocery shopping, etc. I realize many families have worked out equitable arrangements. I know of one.

Remember Shirley Chisholm? She always said, "Men are men." She said that she felt more discrimination because of her gender than her race. I'm sure others would disagree.

What Senate record of BO's are you referring regarding Women's Rights...state or federal? I know of his 'present' votes regarding Choice in Illinois. What votes in the U.S. Senate are you referring?

I know of many jobs that women were not allowed to have...it was simply assumed that women would never be the boss/ceo. I don't know too many male secretaries, do you? Pink Collar jobs are the least paid. Women still make less than men...75 cents on the dollar.

Title IX? Know how that came about? A republican added an amendment to legislation (a poison pill) that would include women. He assumed no one would vote for it. By mistake it was passed. That is how we got Title IX.

W has told the Bureau of Labor Statistics to remove the category of women who work.

Did you know that the UN does not put any value on the work of women when determining grants, economic development, etc. Do you see on TV all those women carrying water on their heads while the boys play soccer in the background? Women do all the farming and gardening and none of this is given a monetary value.

Patriarchy is so accepted that people don't even think about it.

I remember in my own family, I was relegated to cleaning off the table after meals while the boys got to go watch TV. Stereotypical gender roles are NOT questioned anymore. I've read that college kids today want strict gender roles...our Media has had a lot to do with that. The objectification of women has returned. I now have 4 strip joints within a a mile radius of my house. Ever look at any of the sitcoms on TV? No more Roseanne, Murphy Brown, or Designing Women....just cleavage married to ugly fat guys who say insulting things about menopausal women or about pms. Geez, like testosterone has given us world peace???

Women were property until fairly recently in history. Have you looked at what women in the Middle East and Africa and other developing nations are facing? Genital mutilation is even happening in the US. They cut off the clitoris so a woman can not have an orgasm....millions of women endure this.

Sexual slavery is widely prevalent in the world....here in the US as well. Domestic violence and rape is much more prevalent that you think. Women are encouraged to be filled with fear...never take chances...stay inside...depend on men for safety...don't trust other women--they will steal your man. These are messages our culture repeats over and over.

Abortion...Mandatory motherhood...guilt guilt guilt because you are a women...an inferior. All you're good for is having babies.

That's just off the top of my head. Maybe you're young and didn't have to fight for all of the benefits of today that I and others worked for. And now W has rescinded...check out the National Women's Law Center online. The Backlash against women's accomplishments started in 1980 w/ Raygun.

Sexism is the last 'ism' to be overcome. Oh, did I say that in the '60's if you got pregnant, you were fired.

And of course organized religions are based on the assumption that women deserve to be hated...remember Eve?

Oh, and after this primary season where I have discovered how much older women deserve to be ridiculed and hated, I am no longer a Dem. I will not get to see a woman become prez in my lifetime. In fact Pat Buchanan on The McLaughlin Group tonight laughed and laughed as he told Eleanor Clift that she'll never see a woman prez...hahahahahaha. Oh...did you like that 527 Pac named C.U.N.T???

I feel as if I'm back in the '70's again...deja vu, having to make the same arguments. Oh, and if someone would have told me 20 years ago that women would be having breast implants, their toes shaved off, and injections of botulism, I would have thought they were insane. Women have bought this crap hook, line and sinker....they believe they are nothing but receptacles...just objects vying for the male eye. The biggest crime a woman can commit is getting fat....and old. As long as you're not fat when you're old, it's OK...then you are just invisible.

When the MSM started praising BO, I knew something was up...why would the MSM that is owned by 5 rich, white, ugly Republican guys want BO as the candidate? Is he beatable? Did they want to divide the Dems? Young vs. old? male vs. female?

To be frank, I believe BO is one big Marketing Plan...a great big calculated one. He does great sermons. I just don't see anything of substance...I don't feel his conviction. I think he wants to be prez and would deal with the devil to achieve it. I believe The Corporation will own him. I just don't trust him...And I don't appreciate his condescending statements of the Baby Boomers. I don't think he likes women. And that church he goes to is scarey...and so are the people who are advising him...they're scarey. And I really find that Yes, We Can crap annoying. My gut has a very distinct distrust of him. He's not what he appears. And I don't think he can stand up to the Corporation...

At least with HRC, I knew she wouldn't hurt women and children.

edit for spelling

[Silver Gaia]

138. Thank you for this post, femrap.

[femrap]

155. Wow...I wake up this morning and

find 3 Thank Yous for this post...

What a lovely surprise.

My pleasure!

Take care.

[Tom Rinaldo]

143. This needs to be it's own thread - maybe two of them

For the sake of discussion perhaps you should do two threads - the first with all of your amazing comparisons of the different lives that have confronted women and men in both America and the world. The second could put your focus on this political campaign and your thoughts about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Both of course are important - but your overview is so powerful I would really like to see it discussed outside of the specific politics of this primary season. Maybe it should be a GD rather than a GD-P thread.

A lot of people will see this here but many won't because OPs get read more than posts, and my OP will be falling off the Greatest Page soon anyway. What you wrote belongs there.

[femrap]

157. What a surprise...I wake up to

three Thank Yous this morning.

I'll put some thought into writing up a post or two. I rarely start threads.

I appreciate your encouragement, ideas and kindness.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

149. femrap. thank you for this post.

:hug:

[femrap]

153. Wow...what a lovely surprise.

I wake up this morning and find 3 Thank yous for this post!

My pleasure!

Take care.

[angie_love]

182. I appreciate your honest post and heres my response, pls read

To be honest, we probably come from different generations who see this differently. I don't know about your struggles as a woman several decades ago. They probably are not the same as a woman in my generation (I am 27). To me, I feel that I'm treated pretty equally to a man as a woman, I get paid equal if not more than my male counterparts. But thats how I feel and I know you feel differently and I respect that.

I strongly disagree with you about Obama. He doesn't do "sermons", he speaks what we need in our country at this time. After 7 years of Bush, we need a brand new style of leadership, someone to say to the world "yes we've looked long and hard in the mirror and we have grown up". I don't understand where you get that he doesn't like women, thats taking things too far. Why don't you think he likes women, why do you dislike the ppl advising him? What did he specifically say about baby boomers that is condescending?

The reason I choose Obama is mainly b/c of Hillarys IWR vote. When Bush made the case about going to war, I knew he was full of shit and I couldn't understand why he didn't want to wait for the inspectors to finish their investigation as to whether or not there were WMD's in Iraq. I couldn't understand the rush. I thought, as my senator, that Hillary would stand up and vote against it. I voted for her and trusted her to do the right thing. But she failed us. As a result thousands of innocent lives were lost. FOR WHAT??? FOR NOTHING!!!!!! I AM still beyond angry at her that she didn't have the courage to STAND AGAINST BUSH. That doesn't make her a great leader to me, it makes her a wimp for backing down. There were 23 dem senators that day who saw through the bullshit and voted against the authorization for war. Those senators will always have my respect for the courage they showed that day to make a very unpopular but RIGHT decision at that time. To this day, she still refuses to admit she made a fucking mistake voting for that disastrous war. To be honest, I don't think Hillary cares about voters like me, I don't trust her to do whats in our best interests, I trust her to do what she wants and what she wants only. I don't think she'd be open like Obama to take other suggestions, to have the ability to admit her decisions might've been wrong. We had a president like that in Bush who would never admit faults. I hate that. I also dislike the way shes run her campaign, she ran as the inevitable, the flawless, the queen bee, she was so arrogant that she was going to be the nominee that she refused to take her campaign seriously and realize Obama as competition, well she is paying the heavy price for it. And I think that says something to me if she can't even run a campaign effectively as one of the most popular democrats in history. The fact that Obama was able to come from behind, little known except for a 2004 speech and run the most brilliant campaign in recent memory says something to me on what kind of leader he'd be. The mistakes he made in Nevada and NH, he learned from them and moved on. The mistakes Hillary made, she didn't learn from them and she kept making them.

Lastly, here is an article on Obama's record on womans rights. I hope you find them useful.

http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/75648/

http://www.minnesotansforobama.org/docs/natl_issue_flyer_women.pdf

[Control-Z]

122. femrap

You've put into words so much of what I feel.

I think people have forgotten that it takes a little living and little experience to see things for what they really are. I'd say more, but tonight I'm just not up for the punches I'd have to take.

[femrap]

126. Thank you so much...I

really appreciate your words. Every time I hit the reply, I assume I am going to be attacked so I was pleasantly surprised by you words.

Rest..we'll fight another day.

[Control-Z]

127. :o)

:hug:

[Tom Rinaldo]

148. "It seems that mentioning race is a huge taboo, but ridiculing older women is fun, hip!"

I was disgusted by the flood of threads that popped up on DU after the last debate making fun of Hillary for saying "change you can xerox". Let me be clear - I am not talking about the threads that took her on over going negative, or twisting the truth of what Obama actually did, or for being hypocritical herself. Those were all fair political arguments to make against her. The line she used in my opinion did not help her cause, and if it angered some people they have every right to express their anger over it.

What disgusted me was the snickering over Clinton using "outdated" terminology. God, how uncool was that? She actually said "xerox". Can you believe it??

First off I don't give a bleep what word she used or what decade it's use was most prevalent in. Did people understand what she meant? That is what counts. A couple of years ago Wes Clark was railing against Democrats who were caving in to Republicans, and he said; "They need to get some starch!" I am 58, just a little younger than Wes, but I only barely remember when that phrase was used to mean "get a backbone" (more recently people might say "grow a pair" - I guess sexual slang - like "pimp out" is hip). Anyway Clark's supporters, many of whom are a lot younger than him, absolutely LOVED that line! Frankly we were charmed by it. Here was this straight arrow of a guy - "the President we were promised as kids" as so many of us liked to think of him - cut from a sturdy cloth of a former generation that praised hard work and honor, and we thought; "We can use a little more of that in our leaders now". The cross generational connection was warm, it was funny but it was warm. A Clarkie made up buttons with a picture of an Iron and the phrase "Get some starch!" on them and many of us wore them proudly for months - including at a large social gathering we went to with him present.

But the petty ridicule of Hillary was actually more mindless even than it was mean spirited. Assuming she was going to make that point at all, what was she supposed to say instead? Change you can "Copy"? Seriously, what would THAT phrase have meant? The first meaning anyone hearing that would get would be closer to "providing leadership" - being the first to do something that others can later copy. And saying "Change you can make a copy of" instead would have been a ridiculous clumsy phrase. "Change you can xerox" worked in ways that "Change you can copy" couldn't of.

But it provided such a fun opportunity to belittle Hillary for not knowing that people make copies now - not xeroxes, how could they possibly resist?

[Usrename]

158. Cut and paste.

It's all cut and paste these days. Change you can cut and paste.

[Tom Rinaldo]

161. But cut and paste is old technology also

Mostly that is all done with software editing programs now. Anyone petty enough to make a big deal about saying "xerox" instead of "copy" could be just as petty about "cutting and pasting".

[Usrename]

165. Whatever.

Most of the backlash was because it didn't sound very authentic. It sounded like a line her handlers gave to her.

Especially with the "no, no, really Barack.." that she followed it up with. Like she was trying to convince him or something.

[Tom Rinaldo]

166. I didn't argue with that backlash

I was discussing the multiple threads that focused on belittling.

[Usrename]

173. You know what, I never realized that she was such a favorite here.

I thought that she was one of the least favorites, on this site, of the candidates that started this race. Her supporters are tenacious.

[femrap]

206. I totally missed that...

Of course I am of the generation that made xeroxes.

I have to say that what I have seen of the younger generation doesn't leave me feeling that our nation has better days ahead. They say 'it' skips generations...so I'm now looking at the first graders and telling them they need to be creative and use their imaginations.

Thx for sharing the 'Get some starch!' story. I liked Wes very much. I thought he would throw his hat into the ring this time...but I guess he would have been head of DOD w/ HRC as prez.

This rude treatment of HRC has had a huge effect on me...HUGE. I am reassessing my priorities and allegiances. I have many days that I feel America is no longer my home.

One thing for sure....2008 is going to be a very 'interesting' year. I fear for our country.

Take care!

[Breeze54]

189. I've felt the same but if you look here....

there is a whole set of women's issue's that he apparently supports but
they don't include any links to his votes on those issue's that I can find.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/womenissues

Here are some excerpts:

Supporting Research into Women’s Health:
Barack Obama has fought to maintain funding for the Centers of Excellence in Women's Health
at the Department of Health and Human Services. He also supports legislation to encourage
research that will examine gender and health disparities. The same legislation would establish
community outreach programs in underserved areas to help women access health care and maintain
healthy lifestyles.

Fighting Cancer:
Barack Obama is an original co-sponsor of Johanna's Law. Signed into law in January 2007,
the law will educate women and increase awareness of ovarian cancer.

Reducing Health Risks Due to Mercury Pollution:
Barack Obama introduced two pieces of legislation to significantly reduce the amount of mercury
that is deposited in oceans, lakes, and rivers, which in turn would reduce the amount of mercury
in fish.

Supporting Stem Cell Research:
Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which would allow research
of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization
clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility
treatment.

REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE

Supports a Woman’s Right to Choose:
Barack Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him.
However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women’s rights
under Roe v. Wade a priority as President. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme
Court's decision in that case.

Preventing Unwanted Pregnancy:
Barack Obama is an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information
and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention
First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence
and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness
about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.

PREVENTING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Reducing Domestic Violence:
Barack Obama introduced legislation to combat domestic violence by providing $25 million a year
for partnerships between domestic violence prevention organizations and Fatherhood or Marriage
programs to train staff in domestic violence services, provide services to families affected
by domestic violence, and to develop best practices in domestic violence prevention.

Strengthening Domestic Violence Laws:
Senator Obama co-sponsored and helped reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. Signed into law
in January 2006, the bill funds and helps communities, nonprofit organizations, and police combat
domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. The legislation establishes a sexual assault
services program and provides education grants to prevent domestic violence.

Fighting Gender Violence Abroad:
Barack Obama has been a leading voice in Washington urging the end of genocide in Sudan.
He worked with Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) on the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act,
a version of which was signed into law.

ECONOMIC ISSUES

Fighting for Pay Equity:

Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act,
fight job discrimination, and improve child care options and family medical leave to give women
equal footing in the workplace.

Expanding Paid Medical Leave:

Today, three-out-of-four low-wage workers have no paid sick leave.
It is fundamentally unfair that a single mom playing by the rules can get fired or lose wages
because her child gets sick. Barack Obama supports efforts to guarantee workers seven days of
paid sick leave per year, a moderate proposal that should not impose too onerous a burden on
employers.

Investing in Women-Owned Small Businesses:
Barack Obama encourages investing in women-owned businesses, providing more
support to women business owners and reducing discrimination in lending.

Improving Child Support Collection:
Barack Obama introduced legislation to increase child support enforcement by an additional
$4.9 billion over 10 years, a measure that will collect nearly $20 billion in payments from
men who don't fulfill their parental responsibilities. The bill also makes sure that states
pass through 100 percent of collected child support payments to families.

Caring for Women Veterans:
Barack Obama has introduced legislation to force the Pentagon and VA to better track the newest generation of veterans – including the number of women veterans – so that the VA can better plan their care. Obama also introduced legislation to fight homelessness among veterans, with a special focus on treating women who may have been victims of sexual trauma. Along with Senator Claire McCaskill, Obama has also co-sponsored legislation to provide funding for additional caseworkers and mental health counselors, a women’s mental health treatment program, and a comprehensive mental health study of returning soldiers. As president, Barack Obama will fight to ensure that women can get the care they deserve at the VA.

Raising the Minimum Wage:
Barack Obama believes that people who work full time should not live in poverty. The minimum wage hasn’t been changed in nine years and has less purchasing power in real dollars than it did in 1955. Women are the largest group of beneficiaries from a minimum wage increase: 60 percent of the workers who would benefit from an increase to $7.25 are women. As President, Barack Obama would raise the minimum wage, index it to inflation, and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers have a living wage.


---------

More at the link....

A present vote bothers me too

[Breeze54]

191. dupe

:shrug:

[unc70]

197. I agree with your assessment and I am a male Edwards supporter

who hasn't been able to chose either Clinton or Obama.

Obama uses the same technique of the RW of postulating an alleged enemy ("they said we couldn't ...") and then overcoming that enemy. It is a classic bit of oratory, one found regularly in political speeches and in church sermons. I have set through enough of each.

I have posted more at DU about my issues with Obama because those I have with Clinton are well-voiced by others here at DU. Some of my thoughts about Obama are on my journal.

Most of my posts about Obama were while Edwards was still in the race. Any post on DU since then that is not praising Obama is immediately pounced on and attacked. Within the last day, a poster in this thread called me a freeper in another thread and my post repulsive because I had the audacity to mention in that thread about Obama himself being an "absent" father, something he and Michelle have discussed in various venues.

[femrap]

203. I was for Edwards as well....

His words about fighting The Corporation were music to my ears.

I then moved to HRC because I thought she at least would be good to women and children...and that is the majority of people in this nation. I am not a fan of the DLC my any means. I feel she is much more leftist than she can let on. She is experienced and has world connections.

The vile treatment she has received in the msm and on the blogs has made me sick. So sick that I really don't want to be a member of the Dem party any longer....and I am a life long Dem. And it's not the first time that I have felt this sense of betrayal...Johnny Roberts Taliban...I-Lie-too...the funding of the war...no action on the subpoenas.

I don't care what anyone says (or will not admit) but these young newbies don't want their 'mother' to be the ruler of the free world...nor do many men. It's so disheartening...I thought our country had evolved more. Nah. Hey...maybe I should head to Argentina...there's a woman Prez there! S. America has been making great progressive strides.

Oh...one last thing. BO said that the poor people will relate to him because his grandmother in Africa is poor...she has no running water. SEND HER SOME $$$$!!! If he treats his own grandmother this way, how the hell is he going to treat the women of this country? And have you looked at the website of his church? Creepy, huh?

Take care!

[unc70]

207. Obama has a very complicated family in Kenya and UK

His grandmother in Kenya is not his biological grandmother; she is one of his grandfather's other wives. (In polygamous marriages, is step-mother/grandmother still the right term?) His biological grandmother left her family and moved to the city, whatever that meant.

Obama's father had 7 or 8 children by four mothers, so it gets complicated fast. Almost all his siblings live in the UK.

[femrap]

208. Oh shit....nt.

[Raffi Ella]

19. oh you SO NAILED it!

I see so many parallels between the "Us & Them","Anti-Hope" of Obama's Campaign and Bush's "You're either with us or against","You're UN Patriotic if you don't support the War".

He has created that exact atmosphere from the very beginning talking about "They said wait your turn." in Iowa - it wasn't about what he wanted to do FOR america but a challenge,he created an enemy for his followers to 'win' against...

Then in S.C. - "They think this is a FairyTale,that we can't do this" - when in reality HE KNEW that they were talking about his empty rhetoric and near zilch of a resume he dicided to turn it into an Us and them - "THEY think we can't do this,it's a fairy to believe we can."

Actually he did worse,he called the race card on The Clinton's when Bill said his talk and record didn't match up.

And again last night when she said Your Campaign of Hope was xeroxed he turned it into "Oh,You think my fans are delusional and all the people backing me are delusional as though they can't think for themselves!" - He can't answer the critics on the very real concern that he is an empty suit so he turns it into an Us & Them - Just like Bush did to take us to war.

This all seems too similar to Bush.All of it does.It can't be ignored.And on top of that he is pandering to Republicans and just his whole smarmy used car salesmen -like ways and using evangelical like tones while asking for your vote.

Michelle Obama said she'd have to think about supporting Hillary;look at her tone and really think about supporting her if she won the nom;Well I feel the same way about her and her husband now.If Hillary doesn't win this nomination it will be a crossroad for me regarding The Party and politics in general.

[anamandujano]

31. Can I use that beautiful photo of Hillary as an avatar, DemEtienne?

[Raffi Ella]

34. Yes, of course!

can't wait to see it B-)

[anamandujano]

42. Thank you so much.

[Blue_In_AK]

24. Excellent post, Tom.

Some people seem more inclined to "reach across the aisle" to Republicans than they are to reach across the aisle to their fellow Dems. It's disheartening.

[Auntie Bush]

89. Now that's a fact!

I hadn't thought of it that way...but it's true. Obviously they don't care if they alienate fellow DUers. They don't even try.

[anigbrowl]

25. Some Obama supporters also feel alienated by Clinton supporters.

Exhibit a: hillaryis44.com.

Subject to all the same caveats - they're a tiny minority, online discussions are the most concentrated and thus sometimes the bitterest, and so on - I still find these folks pretty obnoxious and militant.

To be honest, I think your OP says more about online culture and its tendency to polarize fans of one vs. the other - whether that's political candidates, game consoles, or cars - than it does about the Obama campaign.

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. Yes, it does go in both directions

I commented more on that in reply to Cali in post #15.

And yes much of this can be generalized to an extent about online culture. But there is an interesting interplay between the online divisiveness of this contest and Obama making a call for Unity with those outside of our Party such an important theme in his campaign.

[2_CentsWorth]

26. Karl Rove's article on Obama's vulnerability

The Rs have an army of people skilled in the art of personal destruction and they will be targeting Obama if he is the D nominee. You have likely read the recent article in the Wall Street Journal titled, "Obama's New Vulnerability" by Karl Rove . This article is substantive and harsh but probably is likely nothing compared to what is likely be in store for Obama if he becomes the D nominee. Any grand strategy ideas in DU Land about how Obama can best deal with or counter the points Rove raised in his article?

[carlotta]

30. Obama's flawed argument

The problem with Obama's contention that he will be able to build consensus that will force Republican politicians to finally work in the interests of the people is this---there is ALREADY concensus on most of the major issues and the Republicans in Congress simply DON'T CARE. Their own vested interests far outweigh the public's concerns.

The vast majority of Americans want us out of Iraq...Republicans in Congress simply DON'T CARE.
The vast majority of Americans want affordable Health Care--the Repubs simply DON'T CARE
The vast majority of Americans support Federal funding for Stem Cell Research--they DON'T CARE.
You can go on with issue after issue like this and the bottom line is that THEY DON'T CARE.

They haven't responded to the people's concerns over the past seven years and I don't believe that's going to change. Now some will say that they risk losing their seats, and I would respond that I think they're willing to take that risk. They'll still have all the special interests with their vast resources and money backing them up.

The Republicans will spend the next four years undermining every Democratic proposal there is in order to take back the White House in 2012--they can't afford for Obama to be successful.

You can argue that well, they would do the same to Hillary. But that's not the platform on which Hillary is running--she's running as the fighter, not the conciliator who will bring people together.

I'm afraid people have set their expectations way too high for Obama.

[anamandujano]

33. Absolutely. I wish someone could get him to speak about this.

He will go to Repukes, they will not go to him.

None of the issues you mentioned will advance the way we need them to with Obama at the helm.

[Recursion]

147. Those "vast majorities" include many Republicans

What's wrong with convincing them our values are consonant?

[Tom Rinaldo]

150. Nothing wrong with convincing Republican voters to leave their party

OK, that is a cheap shot way of putting it, but what I mean is there would be no problem in creating "Obama Republicans" if that is the equivelent of Reagan once having created "Reagan Democrats". But what those phrases are code for is prying voters AWAY from the other Party based on an appeal to their perceived self interests. As a result of Reagan creating more "Reagan Democrats" more RERPUBLICANS like Reagan got elected. That is the goal, to build and expand your own Party.

What is wrong is expecting the Republican professional political class to be motivated to help Democrats succeed politically. That means the Republicans in Congress. That means the Republican "Noise Machine". There are always a few decent exceptions but the professional politicos of the Republican Party do not want Democrats to succeed, and the LAST thing they want is for Democrats to succeed by working to find common ground with the more reasonable planks in the Republican Party platform. That is called "stealing issues" and it is a declaration of war to a Republican Party that has built it's national success by PROMOTING polorization with Democrats. They NEED to paint Democrats as ideologically "too extreme" to have any chance of winning.

Case in point. Republican's regained the House during Bill Clinton's first term using Newt Gingrichs "Contract with America". They never meant most of it - it just sounded good to voters. The first clause of the "Contract" that went out the window was Term Limits as soon as Republicans got into power instead of Democrats. But balencing the budget was a big plank in the "Contract with America". A central plank because the Republicans won elections by painting the Democrats as too eager to spend the voters money while going into debt doing so.

When Bill Clinton agreed with them that in fact balencing the budget WAS a good social goal, and actually came up with budget proposals that achieved that by cutting waste and modestly reversing some of Ronald Reagan's taxe cuts for the rich, that budget had to be passed in Congress WITHOUT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTE in favor of it.

Appeal to the Republicans in the general public, sure, but be prepared for the Republican Party backlash which will be a fury fire and brimstone all out attempt to destroy whatever Democrat who seems to make progress doing so. THAT is what happened to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

[Recursion]

169. Hmm

What is wrong is expecting the Republican professional political class to be motivated to help Democrats succeed politically.

I wasn't aware people were expecting that. Maybe you've missed Obama's point?

[Tom Rinaldo]

181. When framed the wayI did no one would say that they expected that to happen

But my point is that the distinction between courting disgruntled Republican and Independent voters and expecting to be able to find ample common ground with Republicans in Congress repeatedly gets blurred and glossed over. And the Republican Noise Machine is just as likely to throw up coorosive and distracting disunity media static against Obama's overtures to the American political center as they did to Bill Clintons. THAT is how and when the term "politics of division" got coined - in response to Bill Clinton's unifying appeal as a "New Democrat".

[Usrename]

163. Clinton wants to let the lobbyists and special interests run things.

She thinks it's fine when they write the legislation. She honestly doesn't see anything wrong with the way Washington runs. She has said so many times in the debates. She thinks the corporations are people too. She thinks the lobbyists are looking out for our (we, the public's) interests. She thinks that their voices need to be listened to.

The Republicans are fundamentally no different than the Democrats in Congress. They will both do whatever the special interests tell them to do. The same with the Supreme Court. They are completely in the bag for the special interests and the corporatists.

Do you honestly not see the peril we are all in? How far we have descended into the depths of fascism?

We are disappearing people, for crying out loud. I'm sorry, but Clinton offers no hope for a solution. She doesn't even pretend to.

[emilyg]

32. k/r

[Cameron27]

36. K&R

[nam78_two]

35. I am trying to ignore the supporters on both sides & the media and focus on the candidates.

The candidate(s) I was supporting dropped out long back. I am really almost entirely neutral on this one-I really can't see a huge difference(on the bread and butter stuff) between an Obama WH vs. a Clinton one. On most issues-environmental/economic/GLBT/the war, a lot of it will come down to the congress either one has to work with.

That being the case, I find that (as absurd as it is) my enthusiasm about either one fluctuates by the day depending on which of them has supporters (I don't mean DUers necessarily-just any supporter) or media personalities behind them that are annoying me the most at any given time ;). Since I can't see a huge difference between the two, it is easy to let nonsensical trivialities like that affect my opinion. Is that stupid? Of course it is-but we all have our visceral reactions to things. All the negative race/gender related stuff in this case has really made it all very noisome.


So I am trying to focus on their records and their stances on various issues I care about and tune out everything else. In the end, so far I honestly can't see the huge difference between the 2 that their supporters do. I respect the opinions of most of their supporters, but personally I don't see the huge divide-I some pluses and some minuses on both sides. Hey, that is politics...

There are differences sure-I don't see them as being huge.I am pretty much going to happily support whoever the Dem nominee is and I will be oh-so-happy when these divisive primaries are over and we can take on McCain.

[Tom Rinaldo]

39. I do also. But it is hard to ignore both supporters AND the media

It is always worth the effort to try though if the actual message from the candidate him or her self is a worthy one.

[nam78_two]

43. Oh it is definitely hard

I have always been a news junkie and so it is hard to avoid all the coverage of the election. I will all be happy when it is over.

(p.s.: Thanks for the reaching-across-the-aisle effort you and David Zephyr took up over here :thumbsup:-that was very cool :). Hopefully we will see a lot more of that from both sides in coming weeks.)

[murielm99]

54. You are right that there is not that much difference

between the two.

It took me a long time to decide whom to support. Although Edwards had dropped out before our primary, he was on the ballot, and three members of my immediate family still voted for him.

I am very active in grassroots politics. I meet leaders at the state and local level. If you think the arrogance and single-mindedness of Obama supporters is only online, think again. I have been coming across this type of behavior since his Senate primary days. I kept my mouth shut about it before the primary, and of course I voted for him for Senate.

I was leaning Obama early in the race. Since the beginning, I told everyone around me that I would vote for him if he was the nominee. As I watched his campaign unfold in Illinois, many Obama supporters told me that they would NOT vote for Clinton or any other nominee, only Obama. I questioned a few of them about their backgrounds. I found out that many of them are newcomers and people who identify as independents. I thought that was fine. Many of them would learn from us and figure out why we are Democrats. I welcomed them into the fold.

Then, I started meeting some younger supporters who told me things like "the media is liberal" and "I can't stand to be around gay people." I have also run into incredible ignorance about the history of things we know about the women's movement, such as Title IX and choice. One girl told me that it was not important because she and her friends did not remember any of that. The rest of them nodded. My children are in their twenties and they have never been that ignorant!

I'll grant you that that is not everyone. But I have run across this behavior at three different types of grassroots meetings in my state. I have also heard from family and friends in Iowa and Nebraska that there was a great deal of bullying by Obama supporters at their caucuses. This is no way to build a coalition.

I have worked hard for this party, for women's and for gay rights. I will not be dismissed because I am a boomer and because some people seem to have no sense of history. They will be fighting those battles all over again if they are not careful.

Dismiss me and call these things anecdotal if you wish. Tomorrow I am going to a meeting for people who are working for our Democratic Congressional candidate. He is the first viable candidate we have had against the republican incumbent in a long time. If he wins because people cross the aisle for Obama, that will be great. But if I run into any more of the Obama supporter arrogance and anger I have seen across Northern Illinois, I will post it. I know for myself that it does not exist only online.

[Control-Z]

123. Women's issues n/t

[robbedvoter]

37. Great points - and I blame the media mostly - and not just MSM, and not just on line

I just tuned in on Randi - who I used to love - and was hoping to listen to again after the the primaries. She was saying: "can you imagine what they would be saying about Obama if he lost 11 races? "get out of the race" and worse?" Unlike obviously - all that pampering Hillary got....
I was quite surprised reading yesterday that Obama didn't think he was favored by the media - and now here I see one of "our media" during the favoring daily - also not seeing it.
Believing one's press leads to arrogance and mistakes. That's what made Dean's supporters in 2004 act like bullies - not dean himself, but the validation they were getting - for a short time. The media was telling them they were better than us, and they bought it.
The BO people had much more of this - and way more intensely.
So, first of all, my respect for those BO supporters who still behave like decent people - increased ten fold. And there are many of those here.
The others - accepted the superiority mantle and they are wearing it, like the bushies before them. It's human behavior - experiments have been done on it
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083316/plotsummary
I remember one version of it PBS had it - lower key - a seminary where attendees were split in 2 groups - by eye color. Alternatively, for one week, one group was empowered while the other insulted constantly - behaviors like these occurred. And like now, the bullies were unaware of it. "they all do it" was the universal defense.
To me that's the mind boggling part - the lack of awareness of the empowered ones.
I believe now that W genuinely believed that the press was against him, just like BO& supporters do not see any free ride they might have gotten. And they always say 'they all do it" when called.
At least that taught me that this is not about party politics. Given the validation/berating treatment a "progressive" is just about as liable to beat up on a fellow progressive as a right winger was (maybe less guns). We are not in any way superior to the freepers.
And I agree, Tom. Such attitudes, in the likelihood BO wins the nomination will make the rallying in the GE very improbable.

[paperbag_ princess]

41. great thread

I can't say anything better than what has already be posted...so I am just going to nod my head in agreement.

If Hillary does not win this nomination, I am going to have to just sit awhile and think. I will write her in before voting for McCain or before not voting. I am open to being convinced that Obama would be good for the party and nation, but I am not there yet.

[polichick]

44. The only hatred I've seen within the movement is right here at DU...

Which, thankfully, does not reflect what's happening among activists I see in the real world. Many at the Obama meeting I attended last night took time out to talk fondly and respectfully of Hillary.

[robbedvoter]

49. Actually, Randi has now skits making fun of Hillary - and the tone is DU grade

Since I cannot respond there, I turned it off.
MSGOP - I ended long time ago.
And a good friend who said she was "leaning Obama" started screaming at me about hating Hillary - never heard her raising her voice before.
I never saw "leaning" people shake with fury like that - and never that particular friend.

[polichick]

56. There are a lot of angry and frustrated people these days...

Has nothing to do with the Obama campaign or with the populist movement that is taking place in this country. Aware activists in the real world feel that we're about to reach the critical mass required to make a quantum leap in consciousness, and a true transformation of our government and global relationships.

[robbedvoter]

107. Why the frustration? MSM is serenading ya, money pouring in, GOp-ers cross over

top vote for your guy, you have victories - I'd be happily celebrating daily if I had half of your good news. Instead it's just anger and seething hatred.

[polichick]

110. The Obama voters I'm working with on GOTV are thrilled...

Feeling very uplifted after these seven horrible years ~ I'd guess the angry and frustrated ones can't help blaming Dems who enabled Bush & Co.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

119. What I don't get is that they're winning - I like to think I'd be pretty happy.

I have been on the side of a winning politician and I was pretty damn happy - I don't remember the feeling that I needed to beat the opposition into submission along with winning. Maybe they don't really believe they're going to win.

[sueragingroz]

151. That is so disappointing

I thought that Randi was a progressive....

*sigh*

BTW this is a great thread.

[Bluenorthwest]

172. Rhandi and Ed and the whole line up gone from my dial

These shows are gone from my local market, as of this week. All the AAR and other commercial allegedly liberal talkers replaced with Public Radio programming. I for one will not miss any of those shows one bit.

[Catchawave]

57. Have you been to Daily Kos lately ?

It's worse. And in diary form :(

[polichick]

60. No, but that's what happens online...

I would also say that I've seen much more hatred coming from Clinton supporters on this site than going the other way.

Best to get involved in the real world and meet up with people who shoot off their mouths less and DO MORE!

[Catchawave]

77. No, that's what happens in real life too

I live in a pocket of fundie republicans, Pat Robertson's neighborhood, and they HATE, HATE, HATE liberals and all we stand for. I'm involved with real world all the time, thankyouverymuch.

[polichick]

78. Why dwell on the haters??

The point is to meet up with LIKE MINDED people who are doing valuable work toward a progressive U.S. ~ whatever we choose to focus on grows larger in our lives.

[Catchawave]

84. I have no like minded real life friends

all wealthy repbulicans :silly:

There's good people here, you should set an example and provide more positive focus on your candidate. It will build a better website community.

I'm leaning Hillary and for many "off line" reasons :hi:

[libbygurl]

139. Why dwell on the haters? Because they are overwhelming in their presence, online and in the media.

When you get saturated with hatred like that (and why the winning candidate's supporters continue to behave abominably towards the at-present-seemingly-losing one still puzzles me), you can't help but 'dwell on it.'

[mpendragon]

45. hope by itself isn't empty

Our fairly young country has done legendary things like raising the greatest military force the world has ever known to battle the Nazis and Imperial Japan and we put men on the moon. These days our government could stand some polishing up but that's always been the case and we will continue to struggle with that for some time.

This legendary country has been poisoned as of late by a leadership full of gross incompetence and foul corruption. The good people here have had their legs knocked out from under them time and time again by these filthy bastards and I think that has disheartened us. We are capable of almost anything but we need direction and hope.

Roosevelt told the people of this country that we were going to stop an evil plague sweeping the globe. Kennedy pointed to the sky and gave Americans a challenge befitting our greatness. I don't believe in individual great men and great women, we are all flawed human beings, but I believe in men and women who understand the awesome power of the nation with the greatest achievements in history.

I think Barack Obama has the ability to inspire a nation to do great things and good things and if he personally accomplishes little more than that then I say that's enough. I'll concede that many of his supporters have been denied the opportunity of feeling our hearts swell with pride at the accomplishments of our people for too long and the prospect of a revitalized American spirit may have, at times, allowed their exuberance cloud their judgment. It is my hope that with time and a challenge befitting this nation that the energy we see today with the campaign will be focused on a project that will add to the legend of America.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

46. Bowel trouble?

:concerned:

[Leopolds Ghost]

211. It's just the tired old rhetoric of the Split-Pants party...

http://www.katchor.com/Kniplpage.html

[intaglio]

47. Tom, You try talkinf reason to HRC supporters

and they turn off.

I'll just copy something I posted in another thread

How is Hillary a "Good" Candidate?
I keep seeing that and have never had any response when questioning it.

OK, one more time

A) Her primary campaign was badly managed, seriously badly managed

1) There was NO plan in place if her campaign did not have the nomination sewn up by Feb 6
2) There was serious mismanagement of her funds which has resulted in net debt despite any surge in fund raising
3) Campaign staff has been shuffled whith little discernacle impact upon the campaign
4) Campaign staff, notably Mark Penn, have been castigated even by the least critical of supporters on this board
5) Egregious insults have been made, not toward other candidates, but to voters and states (small states don't matter, latte liberals etc)

B) Despite the complete lack of evidence there remains a perception that Hillary and Bill were somehow corrupt

C) Despite the protestations of her supporters Hillary remains an unpopular figure. Huge numbers outside the Democratic Party saying they will never vote for her.

[Tom Rinaldo]

53. Just checking in quickly now - I'll get back to you more later

but I do speak out on some threads started by Hillary supporters when I think they are unfair, and I respond to some Hillary supporter posts on other threads that way also. But the ability to bring people together and put devisive politics behind us IS a big Obama campaign talking point. He set the bar himself on that one and puts a lot of weight on that ability being a major part of what will make him a good Presidsnt. Hillary doesn't oppose that position - but she puts a greater emphasis on the ability to fight for Democratic positions.

[Tom Rinaldo]

85. A follow up reply

No doubt there were serious problems in Hillary's campaign, serious enough that now it will be hard for her to win the nomination; which makes for instant karma if she looses. But if she fights back and still wins, people will acknowledge that she made important mid course directions, late certainly, but adjustments none the less that brought her back from the near dead. And if she pulls that off that will be instant karma also.

As to perceptions about Bill and Hillary's corruption without evidence I wish us all a better ride in that regard if Obama becomes our nominee but I know the Republicans and the media have just barely begun to take him on now. The Clintons were hated not only because Bill took away the White House from Republicans which THEY thought they were ENTITLED to, but also becasue he called their bluff. Balencing the budget was a Republican issue but Clinton accomplished it AND economic prosperity without a single Republican supporting him on his tax policy. They never forgave Bill and Hillary for that. And now Obama is coming along to relive an attempt at the great purple way. We can pray he will come out of this unscathed but I do not think he will either.

As to Hillary being unpopular and folks saying they will never vote for her, I will repost something I posted on another thread today:

That indicates as much to me as the lead Dukakis had over Bush Sr before the contest started
Edited on Fri Feb-22-08 10:03 AM by Tom Rinaldo

Hillary presents herself really well in interviews, on the stump, and in debates. Even most supporters of other candidates here on DU have noticed that if they aren't obsessed with having to stay in non stop candidate advocate spin mode. Hillary angers some of us when she seems to go too negative against another Democrat - but that same quality would thrill us when she used it against McCain. And she would be effective at driving up McCain's negatives when she did so. Hillary also shows humor, intelligence, warmth and grace along with a fighting spirit.

A lot of Americans still tend to think of Hillary as Bill's wife, as an impressive wife perhaps, but as his wife none the less. They haven't really looked at her on her own yet, and many have been infected by the right wing propaganda assault on her that went on relentlessly for a decade. As the wife of the national politician rather than the national politician herself, Hillary did not have nearly the access that Bill did to the media to defend herself and present her own case. Had she tried to hard to do so she would have been seen as over reaching her role and being too pushy.

Americans will see Hillary for themselves and in a new light if she becomes the Democratic nominee. The choice will then be start; Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party or John McCain and the Republican Party. Right now many of those who "claim" they would never vote for Hillary are giving a knee jerk reaction because it isn't real - there are other theortical choices so they don't have to give Hillary another serious look.

[sueragingroz]

152. excellent post /nt

[AGirl]

48. K and R...

[jasmine621]

51. I read you post again. This time something even more troubling

occurred to me. In addition to all the things you said in your OP, their is this nagging anger over the way Obama himself seems to very cagedly demean the Clintons and revering Ronald Reagan and the Republicans with all the "good ideas." I keep harking back to Obama's own comments about the Reagan era and his remarks about Republicans and his seeming repudiation of Clinton's terms in office. I don't mind that he may not hold the Clintons in high regard or even agree with their positions but I do mind that he holds up as the standard someone who, until Obama's campaign, was regarded by blacks as hurtful to civil rights and affirmative action and a party that hates anything having to do with social and economic justice. I can't seem to get this out of my gut becaused I lived through that past that Obama says he has little vested in. I don't blame his young supporters who never knew what it was like during the 60's 70' and 80's and early 90's. But I am more than alarmed by the many folks who lived through those times who seem to shut their minds and memories to Obama's sentiments about those times. It really smarts. And your post has just brought it all to a head for me.

[robbedvoter]

67. Yup. Purging history is one of the stakes in this election - hence the big bucks

[Bongo Prophet]

130. It was only the Clinton campaign that falsely claimed he said "good ideas"- or "revering" Reagan.

If Obama actually said either of those things, I would join you in anger about it.
Fact is, he did not.

These false ideas should be replaced by a dispassionate review of what Obama actually said.
I disagreed with him on several things, and giving out the right wing talking point of Repubs being "the party of ideas" is bad enough. To remember it as "good ideas" is just false, and the lie promulgated by the Clinton campaign was dishonest.

To say that Reagan was "transformative in the sense of challenging conventional wisdom" - well, that is arguable, more like he exploited conventional wisdom of the right and put it in place of the previous conventional wisdom. I hated that as well. but he did not "revere" him for that, just stated it as a premise.



Being accurate is important to me.

Since I am no member of either "cult" - maybe it is easier for me to see.


It is only be being level headed and accurate that we can even begin to discuss how to progress, and it starts always with each of us.
To let either campaign misquote the other is the easiest of things.
I suggest you go back to the original videos, just to check the facts. That is, if you really care about the truth, and not relishing the anger regardless of what the truth is.

Again, an individual choice.

[unc70]

195. No, Obama said it himself. Using all the coded language of Reagan and Jesse Helms

When Obama officially began his campaign he included his attacks on the Baby Boomers and the excesses of the 60's. Maybe you are too young to see the coded phrases, but Obama repeatedly used this terminology from the RW play book for the last 30 years to attack the other Dem candidates, particularly Clinton, and to appeal to the Repub and Repub-leaning independents. He did a similar move against the older leadership of the civil rights movement (in his Moses/Joshua speeches).

If you aren't familiar with the code words and their implications, then you would not even realize that something important to you was just attacked and undermined. I have a couple of entries near the top of my journal that show how they do it. One is a bit over the top, but it shows what some of it really means.

The little video of Obama discussing Reagan was just the tip of the iceberg, let us look beneath.


(Sorry for the bad pun.)

[Bongo Prophet]

201. I will do so, unc70 - always open to the fact that i can miss stuff entirely or in subtle ways.

Pretty familiar with many dog whistle terms, and lived through those decades - so I should be able to pick up on it.

Will check out your journal later tonight when my headache clears a bit.
Thanks:hi:

[Egnever]

52. Rose colored glasses my friend

There is undeniably a deep seated disdain for Clinton. For some it comes from years of right wing attacks for others a weariness of defending her and her husband. I am sure there are lots of different reason for lots of different people.

You speak of Her IWR as if making an apology for it would be enough. As if Kerry or Edwards apologies were enough. They weren't. I truly believe Kerry lost because of his support for the IWR. I know I held my nose for him and voted. I did that only because bush was such a nightmare. I have since come to respect kerry for different reasons. I still would not want him as president though. Edwards was a non starter for me last time around as well as this time. Because of his IWR vote.
Many forgave him for that because of his apology. I was not one of them. Near the end I warmed to him some this time around but it was his IWR vote that kept me from ever taking him seriously.

There is plenty of nastiness to go around from both camps and often people including myself are drawn into that nastiness. To pretend there is more from one side or the other is denial.

There are passionate supporters on both sides and they believe in their candidates and want them to win. Many will go to any length to ensure that will happen.

That does not in any way change the fact that people are hungry for change. All one needs to do is look at the turnouts this year to be assured of that. The ground organization Obama has been building is unrivaled by anyone in political history and will be instrumental in assuring him the presidency.

You may be uncomfortable with the movement but its undeniable that it exists. I understand your investment in your candidate and applaud your restraint when it comes to participating in the nastier threads.

I think you minimize though peoples legitimate disagreements with Hillary. Her campaign from day one has been one of divisiveness. I can list examples of it all day long if you like but I am quite sure if you are honest with yourself you will recognize it. For me at least it is way more than the IWR thats just a classic example of her willingness to do whatever will get her elected regardless of the consequences. Add to that her cluster bomb vote and her kyle leiberman vote and her flag burning amendment vote and you start to touch on some of my disagreements with her.

I respect her tenacity and her willingness to put herself out there in the fae of continuous withering attacks but thats about where my respect ends. I disagree with her votes and her campaign style vehemently.

Sometimes it brings out the worst in me and I guess I am a bad guy cause of that. I don't want her anywhere near the white house however. Her campaign has shown me how disastrous she would be if her previous votes had not.

I am sure there are plenty of reasons why you like her. We just disagree. You seem to me to be a fine person and well informed our priorities just appear to be different.

I would have replied to this post in the other thread but it got locked.

[PassingFair]

58. I agree with you, Egnever.

And to go one step further, I'll say this:

I do NOT care for the influence that the DLC has had in the Democratic Party.

I was THRILLED when the democrats of Connecticut threw Joe Lieberman under the bus.

The LAST person I'd vote for is one of their LEADERS.

[Egnever]

62. That just adds to the list

The animosity her camp holds towards Howard Dean is another in my long list of reasons I dislike her.

[Tom Rinaldo]

86. Whether or not it is Obama's intent

A victory by Obama will give the DLC a perfect opportunity to repackage, reinvent, and reassert themselves by embracing Obama's campaign rhetoric. Obama is in many ways a "third way" Democrat, with his focus on a purple America. He gives the DLC perfect ideological cover for their agenda, and an opportunity to sell it with an updated PR campaign mimicing Obama's campaign oratory. If Obama wins the DLC will procalaim he won because he moved away from the traditional Democratic class warfare and oppositional politics by seeking new solutions from the vast center of American politics where Democrats and Republicans can find commonality. The DLC were the originators of that creed. Obama would give them a new lease on life.

And for the record I am a strong supporter of Howard Dean and what he has done at the DNC.

[PassingFair]

111. Only if he embraces them, O wise one.

While Hillary remains one of their LEADERS.


"Obama would give them a new lease on life."

I do not see him fulfilling your prophesy.

:rofl:

[Tom Rinaldo]

88. Sorry it has taken so long to get around to your post

Back in late December when I decided to support Hillary Clinton I had to cross my own personal bridge regarding the IWR, and I wrote about it at the time - it's in my journal. I had to face that same bridge in 2004 with Kerry, except that time I backed a candidate against him in the primaries who was not an IWR supporter. Still when Kerry and Edwards became our ticket I worked for them over Bush.

When I made my choice I weighed in Obama's stance regarding the IWR at the time, and I factored that as a reason to support him over Hillary. For me the final balence of factors left me supporting Clinton, but I can appreciate how others can feel differently. But in my OP I brought it up in the context of comparing the blame placed on Hillary for starting a war with Iraq - often to the point of blaming her exclusively in arguments here, to that placed on other Democrats. Of course if pressed anyone will finally admit that Bush had a hand in it, but it the countless DU threads that accuse her and her alone of the death of tens of thousands of people are insulting when other Democrats who voted just like her remain well regarded here. You are being even handed in the opinion you are expressing here, others most definately are not.

Of course there is nastiness all around, but to pretend that it is absolutely equal to me is a form of denial. First, just speaking logically, the odds are slim that anything is ever perfectly balenced. It might just be the fact that so many people are so emotionally invested in blaming Hillary for the Iraq War, while viewing Obama as a hero who spoke out early against it, that explains why the decks have been so far stacked against Hillary - making her the greater target of hate. Maybe you think that is a reasonable consequence, but it is a consequence nonetheless. Hillary had gotten far more disdain on Democratic message boards than Obama has, though Obama has gotten disdain also.

I see much positive in the movement that Obama has galvanized around him. I tried to say that above but I did not devote much space to that I admit. I am not uncomfortable that the movement exists, on the whole I am glad that it does for reasons larger than this nomination contest. But for me the time had come to say some of the things that I did in this thread. I would be happy if some of the feedback I gave in some ways leads to it becoming an even more effective movement - though I am not enough of a meglomaniac to think my OP will have much of a lasting inpact on anything.

I know there are legitimate reasons to not back Hillary Clinton, many of them in fact, and I agree with a number of them personally. I back her with my eyes open, but with my eyes open I see that she is a pretty good human being, a brilliant and hard working person who has spent her life fighting hard on the correct side of the great divide. She is tactical, more tactical than I like sometimes - but you know what? I see that same quality in Obama. I weighed my choices and ended up with Hillary but if Obama wins I will be there for him.

For the record I see some divisive things that both campaigns have done, though I don't really want to spin off into debating that now. On the whole however I honestly think this has been a relatively clean presidential primary campaing - certainly cleaner than the 2004 contest in my opinion. If you can appreciate a basketball metaphor I think Barack Obama showed a great talent for drawing fouls against the opposing team. And that is a carefully honed skill in basketball.

[Catchawave]

59. Hardcore Edwards Supporters are still deciding, most are

uncommitted. I wish the remaining candidates' supporters will think about that too. We want to be inspired again :toast:

If bloggy world wants to aspire to be the alternative media, give us some news to chew on. For spittles, we can still go to MCM.

Good post Tom :hi: It needs to go to Daily Kos too, I don't recognize that place anymore either :silly:

[catagory5]

63. OP thank you

Nice read!

[Tom Rinaldo]

90. Hi Catchawave! Thanks

I do have this Diary up at Mydd also. It really takes a lot of energy to post something like this at kos nowadays. I have to be ready to strap myself into my seat and take incoming heat for a coupld of hours with nothing else to do. I may though, possibly tomorrow, but it is taking a lot of time to do justice to responding to posts here already.

I have only posted a couple of blogs on Kos lately, I'm not spending much time there. I hear it is even more intense than here.

[whatchamacallit]

64. Utter crap

I bet if someone counted up all the potentially alienating posts from both sides you wouldn't be whistling this shrill little tune. Sorry Brainiac.

[Tom Rinaldo]

91. I like you too. n/t

[Auntie Bush]

94. You haven't been around long enough to make such a decision.

Maybe you should really start counting.

[Auntie Bush]

95. Dupe, sorry.

[Capn Sunshine]

66. Tom, if the world were DU, I'd say well done.

but the world is so very different from DU I have to assume this post is for the tiny fragment of Democrats who post here.

Those things you ascribe to our campaign are quite.....fanciful, for lack of a better word.
Unless you think it's somehow unusual for Democrats not in favor of Clinton to not favor her candidacy.

So, in the real world, I have many many friends and fellow Democrats who are on Hillary's campaign. I can't see them threatening to walk away over who wins like the 44s do here in DU.

[Tom Rinaldo]

79. I don't think DU is the real world Capn

but of course it is part of my world and that is part of it. Still, though I think it is a distorted world I do not think it is a world totally divorced from the real world either. And the netroots blogs often get picked up on and amplified by the media - usually starting with cable news until a meme sets in that starts taking root. We saw how that worked with the Drudge Report long ago.

And though DU and Kos (which is much larger and has similar dynamics to DU) are not representative of the Demomocratic Party, and attract a wide assortment of participants, they also have more influence that the average group of twenty thousand Democrats. Anyone doubting that need look no further than to Chicago last Summer when all but one of our candidates trudged over to Yearly Kos for a debate there while other Party leaders showed up in droves as well.

DU attracts a lot of members with a lot of idle time but it also attracts a lot of members who are very involved in grassroots and Democratic Party politics. It actually has a fairly rich mix of involved Democrats for its size, and they all have friends and families also.

I know things are different in the online world, but we here all live in the offline world also and not all of us have had your positive experience there either. Bottom line; think globally act locally. This happens to be a community that I have long been in dialog with and this is where I wrote this. Thank God we both agree that offline isn't the same as online in this regard.

[Tennessee Gal]

68. Tom, you have expressed in real terms exactly what I think.

Thank you for that.

k & r

[Whisp]

70. it starts from the top.

I think the divisiveness lies squarely on the Clinton campaign managers who started the slinging (remember early on Hillary saying, Let The Fun Begin? - and with such glee!) -this kind of behaviour dribbled down to the fans. The course was chosen by the campaign and taken over by the supporters.

The nasty stuff came from on high in the Clinton camp. the nasty stuff in retaliation comes from Obama's supporters. Not Obama himself or his campaign - who has conducted himself very well and has not muddied himself like Hillary has.

There is a Lot of very questionable history in Hillary's background - IWR, bankruptcy act, NAFTA, outsourcing, Kyle/Lieb., etc. etc. Many times when these errors in judgement are brought up by obama supporters as a bona fide point of discussion, they are dismissed and ridiculed and charged as being 'hateful' and unfair and freeperish to shut down the dialogue.

[madfloridian]

72. Tom, they said the same thing about the Dean movement.

People who worked in the Dean campaign are everywhere in the campaigns and state parties now.

The Obama people are going to be the same way.

I was not against Hillary until she suddenly decided to go after Florida delegates.

I now support Obama, so does most of our family.

I resent the concern.

[Tom Rinaldo]

92. I'm sorry you "resent the concern" MF

"They said" some pretty bad things about the Clark movement also. Here are a few sentances I just put in a post above that I think fit here also:

I see much positive in the movement that Obama has galvanized around him. I tried to say that above but I did not devote much space to that I admit. I am not uncomfortable that the movement exists, on the whole I am glad that it does for reasons larger than this nomination contest. But for me the time had come to say some of the things that I did in this thread. I would be happy if some of the feedback I gave in some ways leads to it becoming an even more effective movement - though I am not enough of a meglomaniac to think my OP will have much of a lasting inpact on anything.

I absolutely agree that the people who Obama is bringing into the party now will enrich the Democratic Party in countless ways for a long time to come. I was one of the posters here on DU who routinely defended Obama supporters on the flurry of threads that popped up here for a few days talking about cultists. I do not wish Obama supporters ill - I want to be able to work togehter in the Summer.

[Bongo Prophet]

134. As I prepare to log off, I just want to say that I appreciate your thoughtfulness & share your goals

I went all wordy up above, but am so glad you are speaking in depth and are being analytical - more of this will ease the transition we need to make. The escalation has made folks read "body language" and other nebulous insults, and that needs to be overcome somehow. Though doubtful, I can only cling to some tiny bit of hope that we can stand together against the RW crap that will be thrown against our nominee.

This is crucial, and why the rightwing operatives have been working to exploit and escalate our differences into a frenzy.

It is important to remember how they work - remember Phil Parlock, remember Lee Atwater and Rove.

This is how the right fights the center-left coalition.

[NMMNG]

73. Very well stated

K&R

[madfloridian]

74. Do you think Hillary is a good leader to go against party rulings?

To fight three court rulings to get Florida's delegates?

[Tom Rinaldo]

96. Here is my "short answer", lol (it's a big question)

The first part is taken from another post on another thread.

She will fight within the rules.

The DNC is like the Board of Directors of the National Democratic Party. The National Democratic Party Convention is like the annual shareholders meeting. Rules that allow challenges to the earlier DNC decision about FL and MI are legally entered into the books. Clinton says she will pursed that, and she explains why. It is no more cheating to do that than it is cheating for shareholders who want Corportations to improve their environmental policies to press a challenge to the Board of a corporation at a shareholders meeting regarding their choices in that regard.

The situation regarding FL and TX is complex and there are Democrats who are not Clinton partisans who also believe it would be a grave mistake to disenfranchise over 2.25 million Democratic voters. There are arguments on both sides.

At other times I have written that there has already some punishment given to Florida and Michigan and that should at lest be acknowledged. The ban on candidate campaigning in both states directly undercut the reasons why both states moved up their primaries. They received less attention than the states that played by the DNC rules, not just from the candidates but from the media also. They did not have a role in helping to shape the momentum of the race. They lost out on many millions of dollars of revenue that bypassed each state when the primary express skipped their stops. In terms of giving teeth to DNC rulings, the campaign ban that the candidates agreed to effectively established a deterrent to other states trying the same in the future. And the rational for stripping their delegates all along has always been to provide an effective deterrent to prevent repeats of this in the future.

Now we are faced with a backlash in Florida that might make it much harder for Democrats to win in 2008:

Florida 2008 Presidential Election
Florida: McCain Leads Clinton and Has Bigger Lead Over Obama
Monday, February 18, 2008

"The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Florida shows John McCain holding a six-percentage point lead over Hillary Clinton and an even larger lead—sixteen percentage points—over Barack Obama. It’s McCain 49% Clinton 43% and McCain 53% Obama 37%. This dynamic is the opposite of what we have found in most other states where Obama typically outperforms Clinton in general election match-ups.

The Florida results for a Clinton-McCain match-up are fairly similar to other battleground states--the race is competitive, Clinton does better among women than men, and McCain leads among unaffiliated voters.

However, the poll contains hints that suggest the controversy over Florida’s convention delegates may be hurting Obama. Most notably, just 55% of Sunshine State Democrats say they would vote for Obama over McCain. Thirty-one percent (31%) say they would vote for McCain. These results are especially striking given that Obama leads McCain among unaffiliated voters in the state..."

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/florida/florida_2008_presidential_election

[madfloridian]

109. The rules say the DNC has control over the primary dates.

I just posted 3 court cases that stood with the DNC.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1848

So what part of the rules say that FL is an exception?

Terry McAuliffe told Levin that he would not let MI delegates near Boston. He screamed at him.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1638

What are we getting into here?

[TheDoorbellRang]

75. I think a lot of the acrimony is because of the B*sh presidency

Just speaking personally for a moment. Before W got into office, I always thought that if my candidate didn't win, it would still be ok, and there's always be "the next time." Even in 2000, I was only mildly disgusted when Gore got shafted; I really didn't pay much attention to politics back then, sad to say. Well, W's presidency has certainly changed that, not only for me, but for millions of Americans, I think.

So that makes this election different. Everyone understands at a visceral level just what is at stake here. Unfortunately, everyone here has also personally determined that their choice of candidate is the best and/or only candidate who can win in the fall. The consequences of Dems losing in the fall are dire, and I think the fear of those consequences has fueled some of the hysterical posts we've seen from both camps.

I'm not sure what the solution is -- I guess repeated posts by the leveller heads on both sides is about all we can do.

[Tom Rinaldo]

93. Thanks for putting that into words

I never quite put that two plus two together in that way before, but I have travelled down that exact same road.

[murielm99]

98. I can remember similar sentiments after the first Bush

Presidency.

Even though I live in a red area, things were dire. Many people in both parties were frightened that they would lose their jobs and everything they had worked for over a lifetime. The fear was widespread.

There was so much disgust that I believe it gave Perot's candidacy a chance. People were tired of everyone, left and right. The people who think Bill Clinton lost Congress need to remember this. Many people wanted to wash their hands of those in power, regardless of party. Congressional Democrats were too complacent and did not see it.

Even though we had not lost as many of our civil liberties, even though the Supreme Court was not yet as critical an issue, even though we did not have an unjustifiable war on our hands, the public perception was that we needed widespread change. Things are only that much worse now.

If Obama wins the Presidency, he needs to be reminded of the recent and more distant past. He needs to work with his party first, and forget about reconciliation with republicans, until they prove they are willing to compromise. If he fails, he will be a one-term President, and the republicans will be back in power, doing even more damage. I worry about where this divisive behavior will take us long-term. There are real Democrats in power who are willing to work with him. I hope both sides can remember that.

[sueragingroz]

154. I agree. Much is at stake. /nt

[Johnny__Motown]

76. You need to apply the same standards to Hillary you clearly don't this is hypocritical

[Straight Shooter]

82. Thank you, Tom.

I thought Obama was okay at first. Nothing special, just okay. Then as the primary season continued, all over the Internet, no matter where I turned, there was so much venom towards Hillary and so much of a sense of desperation that the savior of the Democratic party has arrived, how dare I support another.

It was bad enough in 2004 to have people leaning on me to support Kerry, whom I saw as a very weak candidate. Now, within the Democratic party is an openly anti-Hillary agenda, against Hillary as a person, not just as a rival. And Obama is taking full advantage of it. Okay, more power to him, then, because politics is brutal, but don't expect me to admire him for his "unity" sermons when his campaign engine is substantially fueled by Hillary hate. I shouldn't take it personally, but I do, because I spent a long time deciding on a candidate, and I like her as a person, from what I see of her.

I firmly believe Hillary will be the more effective leader. That's where I stand.

[Sparkly]

87. I think these are all valid points, Tom.

After the primary, whichever way it goes, I trust Obama will try to unite the party, and thus express positive thoughts about Clinton. Will he be able to lead his supporters to supplant vilification with respect? I don't know if anyone could do that. As you point out, it goes back a long way -- and absolutely, it was all sown and grown on the right.

What would you think of a "unity ticket" with both Clinton and Obama on it? Is there a possibility, would it accomplish what you're suggesting here, and (biggest question in my view) would they be good running mates for each other?

[Tom Rinaldo]

103. It would be a great ticket if both parties actually felt good about it

There are many politicians who for any one of many reasons do not want to run for Vice President. And personally I am a believer in thinking that some positive personal chemistry should exist between the President and VP - not necessarily huge amounts but some. I honestly have no real clue how well Obama and Clinton can cooperate at close quarters and now the experience of this campaign has effected that.

From a classical perspective Obama as a relatively young man with a thin resume is the type of person who normally would not run for President this quickly, and 8 years from now he would still be young enough to run for two Presidential terms on his own. But this is obviously not a traditional year. The other way around might be even more difficult because Obama would be inheriting an ex Presdient as his VP's spouse even if Hillary was open to it.

But who knows?

[Viking12]

97. Short OP: "There's some dickheads that support Obama & post at DU...

...so I now have grave concerns about his candidacy."



:eyes:

[Tom Rinaldo]

100. You could get a job writing headlines for the New York Post n/t

[Viking12]

120. ..and you a feature writer for 'Concern Troll Quarterly' n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

121. Thanks for the kick n/t

[blm]

101. I view Clintons differently than you based on THEIR ACTIONS over the years against other Dems

and their protection of the Bushes and their cronies.

I hold THEM responsible for what they said and did to support Bushes and undermine Democrats opposing them. Their record is quite clear to me. It's as simple as that, Tom.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

And it started when Bill took office:
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[Sparkly]

106. Your first link is about Bill Clinton. Your second link is about James Carville.

I didn't watch your third link, and didn't bother with your fourth based on your citation that "it started when Bill took office."

Think what you wish. Tom is right that most of the criticisms of HRC are old RIGHTWING-propagated ones. (Correct me if that's a mis-paraphrase, Tom.)

[robbedvoter]

108. It's an obsessive poster. I doubt Obama even figures in the equation - it's just

hate the Clintons all the time.
(also for the love of another IWR voter, Kerry)

[blm]

133. Why robbed? Why say that about me when you could just try and refute what

was posted? Is attacking me the security blanket to hide from the facts contained in the links?

Thanks alot. You would reward those who thought NOTHING about you or this country when they were undermining the work and efforts of those opposing BushInc.

No - you direct your venom to those who have done the heaviest lifting over the years while being undermined by those you want rewarded.

Ever just TRY refuting what Brinkley, Woodward and Parry have said and written without attacking me personally?

[robbedvoter]

142. because after 100 times, refuting becomes futile. You post the same thing over and over

And blaming the Clintons for Kerry's cowardice in conceding a victory is absurd on its face.

[blm]

194. Then show me where McAuliffe secured the election process and where Carville

refuted Woodward's story of election night.

You think McAuliffe didn't KNOW that by not countering RNC's tactics in states like Ohio that it would assure RNC controlled every level of the process where the votes are allowed, cast and counted? You think he didn't KNOW that after 2000's fraud revealed in the hearings?

You want to blame Kerry for something he HAD NO EVIDENCE but you want to REWARD those who worked to make SURE Rove and the RNC had control of any evidence.

You can't even point to one time ny of those links I post have been refuted robbed, let alone the 100 times you claim.

Next I guess you'll be siding WITH the deep-sixing of all the investigations, too, as if they were GOOD for this country.

[blm]

132. You think they act separately? And I doubt Parry has ever even been quoted by a RW

When did the RW ever notice that BushInc, which was at its weakest point by Jan 1993 and cornered by a few honest Democrats who worked for years uncovering its illegal operations, was left off the hook for all the outstanding matters being investigated?

Did you really expect to find a RW criticism of Clinton at consortiumnews?

[OzarkDem]

104. They're pushing a candidate who will lose in the GE

Guaranteed.

McCain is polling very strongly against both candidates, the GE isn't going to be a cakewalk. We really need to think seriously about backing Clinton or we could lose the WH again.

[PassingFair]

112. Hillary, with her negative ratings is the guaranteed loser, not Obama.

That's why he began picking up steam as soon
as it became apparent that the DLC had failed
in their inevitability scam.

Obama is polling as a winner against McCain.
Clinton is polling as a loser, and NO ONE is
saying it will be a "cake walk".

That's an expression best saved for Neo-cons.

You need to think seriously about backing Obama,
or we could lose the WH again.

[ErnestoG]

129. That's what the polls say.

And what the Hillary worshippers are loathe to hear.

[Tom Rinaldo]

145. That's what the polls said about Mike Dukakis also

untill the Right wing got around to defining him to a public that only knew his then current appeal but little about the details of his prior political career.

P.S. and at least one major poll is showing Clinton running much stronger than McCain in Ohio. Not that that state matters much.

[PassingFair]

160. Link? n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

162. There was a poll posted on GD-P yesterday with that as the OP

Whoever finds time to look for it first can post the link.

[Tom Rinaldo]

209. Here you go. A brand new one. Clinton running 7 points better in Ohio against McCain:

http://www.wkyc.com/news/rss_article.aspx?ref=RSS&storyid=83795

[ErnestoG]

204. Obama never bounced around in a damned tank

[oasis]

113. Recommended reading. Kick for the weekend crowd.

:kick:

[Spiffarino]

115. Good post

I'm not a Hillary supporter in the primary, but I don't disrespect any who are. Everybody has their reasons, and it's a fact that there isn't a dime's worth of difference in terms of the kind of America they each envision. Hillary will make a great president, as will Barack.

My problem with the Clinton political machine is in its willingness to use tactics that degrade other Dems. Democrats generally don't like to see their candidates attack other Democrats, especially ones we like and most of us like both of the remaining candidates very much.

This election season, we had a slew of great candidates. They were all a little different from each other, but in the end their vision for our country was strikingly similar. Just because we're down to two doesn't mean it's time to play cutthroat. We have to win this one and we can't allow our desire for one or another candidate to ruin those chances.

I hope Hillary and Barack will unite and pledge from here on to promote themselves and the Democratic brand, but just say no to negativity. I also hope that the candidates' supporters will do the same and show each other respect. We all want to see a big change come November and we musn't blow it by attacking each other.

Let's save that for the Republicans.

[cooolandrew]

116. His movement is more based on voters with cross overs they will pressure GOP candidates in a liberal

... direction. It's all about getting Americans all on the same page than the actual representatives. He is setting up a solid Democrat base the likes of FDR had back in the time of WWII. For a far safer nation you do want an America working for one another, an america with consideration is respectful to women's rights and respectful to the environment. The future is potentially so bright if we just reach out an grab it. We see how Brack is so for the party in how he has generated more funding for a vast amount of Dems in the party. He truyly is the binding force not working for division but that harmony that liberals have longed for. If you stand back and see what he is accomplishing without eny emotive feelings you will see just how much love this guy has for his country and party. Inspiring the young to actually believe in their nation again once you get their vote for 3 terms you have them for life, putting the party on more solid ground. I understand he will not be to some folks tastes but if you lvoe your country you can see he is the answer. There is always the option now to pressure barack to take a female vp who will be a sure fire president once his tenure is over.

[madfloridian]

117. It's my second time around as a cult member.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1849

[Tom Rinaldo]

118. I didn't call you a cult member then and I don't call you one now either n/t

[nonconformist]

125. Excellent post. K & R. nt

[libbygurl]

140. Thank you for another well-reasoned opinion piece, Tom, with which I agree completely.

You and others who've commented here have expressed all that I feel and think about this whole 'movement'. It has turned me completely off on giving any form of support to O if he becomes the Dem nominee. He's on a winning streak right now, and can't have the grace of the victor in his behaviour, and neither do his supporters.

All they're doing is behaving like big bullies, just like the Republicans with W.

[libbygurl]

141. K & R!

:hi: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[devilindisguise]

164. Phoney Cheers for Obama

These are obviously hired yellers (as in Bush's campaign). Hey,no-one cheers like that for anyone except Elvis. Not in my lifetime, and it's been a long one. So I say this: "Barack is no Elvis". And his like for republicans is a real turn-off for me. Of course they are voting heavily for him, and the thing about "uniting" is so phoney. These two parties - dem and rep. have never been "united". The reps. were out of power for 50 years during the '90s and they so bitterly resent it, they want to keep having rep. presidents, and they will do anything or smear anyone to achieve their objective. The statements Obama made about Reagan having "great ideas". Wow, what a laugh. Reagan cut dying people off social security. Does anyone remember that? People were living under bridges. Does anyone remember that? I am so shocked that Hillary didn't bring this up about Reagan - plus his union busting and runing Air Traffic Control. She should have came out with a statement, and she didn't. Therefore _ I feel something really fishy is going on, because she is certainly old enough, and smart enough to remember those things from Reagans borrow and spend administration. Maybe Rupert Murdoch picked Obama. I wouldn't be surprised. If Obama is going to "reach across" to reps., he had better be prepared to "borrow and spend" and we the US are already bankrupt and so destitute as to borrow form the Chinese who are rapidly building their armies to collect what we owe them.

[question everything]

170. I vs. We - Hillary's dilemma

I've noticed it, too. However, if Hillary were saying "we" it could be implied she and Bill, and she really does not need this.

[Tom Rinaldo]

171. I never thought of that. You are right. Excellent point. n/t

[bluerum]

175. The paradox has been - vilify Clinton and her supporters - reach out to the repukes.

I am not sure why the Obombers can't see that - in general they seem like an intelligent if somewhat fanatical crowd.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

177. I can't wrap my brain around that either

[ErnestoG]

205. No one has embraced the pro war GOP like Hillary Clinton and J Lieberman

Wanna try that one again?

[kiva]

179. I've been reading this thread for the last couple of days

and :thumbsup: to the OP and the majority of posters from both sides who have made some very thoughtful comments--this sort of discussion is why I joined DU.

[LiberalFighter]

185. Where will the Obama supporters be after the election?

Will they be involved on the local level bringing new blood to the party? Or will they disappear?

At our breakfast meeting this morning there was some discussion about the effect 4 years ago when Dean was creating a movement. We had large meetings of Deaniacs until Dean dropped out. And the result were just a few that continued to be involved.

There will be several phases to gauge the involvement. The second phase for us probably begins after our state convention. We will see how much involvement of new volunteers there will be in getting the candidate elected. The last phase will be how many will continue to be involved after the election.

[oasis]

187. Excellent question. (eom)

[artfan]

186. As far as I am concerned Obama jumped the shark

he is saying he is a unite but his tactics are becoming increasingly destructive. I was drawn to his positive message but am turned off by the underhanded and false mailings etc his campaign is using. I guess Hillary will get my vote now.

[BooScout]

192. Excellent Post

His 'movement' has made me want to turn my back on the Democratic Party and walk away for good. I haven't done it yet because I waiting to see how things sort themselves out between now and November. The hatred directed at Clinton and people who support her, and anyone over thirty it seems has totally disgusted me these past few months.

[oasis]

202. C'mon gang let's "get real". And I mean that.

:think:

[cooolandrew]

212. The difference I find is that there hasn't been anylebelling of HRC uspporters. We accept your

support of her. We wouldn't say cultist or anything of the such. We just disagree with the negative slant her campaign has taken. This is the time torenew faith in the system than not do that. We respect your support, but are disappointed with her campaign.