Fear drives hate

[intaglio]

Many people have posed the question "Why the hate?" that has appeared. Well last night, my time I was posting an answer to a post regarding Obama when, out of the blue, a reason for at least part of the hate appeared. That reason, of course is fear. this fear applies to both camps of DU partisans.

And what is that fear? It is the fear of losing the Presidential election.

Obama supporters who hate Hillary see her as meaning more Democratic Leadership Convention, more ignoring states that don't matter, more triangulation, more microtrend analysis, more division. They see her campaign is dull, pedantic, negative and ultimately weak. They do not see someone who has survived smears beforehand but someone who has still accepted support from crooks like Hsu and the whole turkish connection.

Where the Clinton campaigners see their support of Hillary as reasonable, Obama supporters see blind advocacy of a supposedly experienced candidate who has failed to show one ounce of initiative or foresight and whose troubles are of her own making eg not being in charge of her own campaign.

All of this leads Obama supporters to think that Hillary's campaign is fatally flawed and ultimately a losing one.

On the other side Clinton supporters are equally fearful of the loss of the Presidency by a campaign that they characterise as a cult. They know that the only truly successful presidency for the Democratic Party in forty years was the Clinton presidency. Obama is seen by them as flawed, all words and no substance, tainted by his Chicago contacts and above all inexperienced.

Thus the Clinton supporters see Obama's campaign as fatally flawed and ultimately losing.

The two groups of the terrified fall into insults and counter insults. Those favouring Hillary charge sexism (which has been in a few posts), blind faith, foolishness, lying and gloating. Obama's supporters counter with racism, assumed superiority, self deception and lying. In this battle of fear and insult there is little that can reconcile the groups. Fear driven hate consumes them to the extent that neither side can rationally examine their own beliefs or the true strengths of the candidates campaigns and the true weaknesses

Faced with this it is essential to choose honest brokers who can break the deadlock. I do not pretend to be such a broker as I have posted far too often in defense of Obama and while I might believe I am "honest" in this sense I doubt that I could be seen as such by the Clinton supporters. I can and will post my views in future and will end this little journal entry by writing some comparisons.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Corruption
Rezko and others vs Hsu and others - advantage to no-one. Shouldn't some DUer check out McCain's sleazy connections? On the other hand because Obama has published his tax returns early and because Hillary is sticking to precedent she has left the impression that she is having to "clean up" her accounts - advantage Obama

Experience
Hillary is older and has been around politics for longer but her actual record is very weak; Obama has had less interaction with politics in the "big league" but his achievements in that time are at least as great as Hillary's. The problem is that because Hillary has been round longer there is more folklore about her and a lot of this is denigrating - advantage Obama

War
A real problem. Hillary cannot escape the fact that she did vote for the IWR and she did not vote for Leahy's amendment. Obama was not in the Senate at this time but his objections to the IWR are on record. On the other hand both Hillary and Obama voted for funding for the troops; a decision that has all the marks of being politically convenient, for both can say they support the troops even though they are against the war. This issue is a marginal advantage to Obama

The Campaigns
Obama's really big advantage because of what he has done to what was believed to be the "top predator" in the Democratic Party. However it happened, Obama is front runner and Hillary is left playing catch-up. Hillary has a campaign team that failed her and left her short of money. She has had to "go negative" early - Advantage Obama

The Policies
From what I can make out there is actually very little difference between the two - no advantage to either.

[writes3000]

1. Your title is spot-on correct.

I won't argue about your take on each candidate because I'm sure others will. I appreciate your attempt to get at the root of all of the craziness.

You are absolutely right. The stakes for this election are huge.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Two best Dem candidates - other than Bubba - since LBJ. nt

[Window]

3. K/R.

[intaglio]

4. I have tried to be fair

The US has two excellent candidates in HRC and BHO all I can hope is that some of the more ammenable posters take time out to find an honest broker. Mind you the true trolls on both sides will not :-(

[pdxmom]

5. K/R.

[niceypoo]

6. K&R

[hfojvt]

7. I thought there was some knowledge there too, driving the hate

the fact that the Clinton Presidency was not all that successful from a progressive point of view.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/71

Also, about the war, I see that as a more than a marginal advantage for Obama. He did just what I would have done. I opposed the war from the beginning, but once it had started I was not in favor of immediate and unconditional withdrawal. Nor did I ever think that voting against funding would accomplish anything, except guaranteed electoral defeat for Democrats in close elections.

[intaglio]

8. You echo my beliefs

but it is very difficult to call one way or the other in respect of the War votes. The big one for me was the campaign failures

[Captain Hilts]

11. Bubba tried to be more progressive and conservative Dems, like Sam Nunn...

spoiled it. The result was a Republican congress and senate, which tied Bubba's hands.

[hfojvt]

12. in my view he ran as a Republican in 1992 from DAY ONE

He ran on a middle class tax cut and bashed Bush as a tax increaser. Then, when elected he pushed through a tax increase. That's part of the reason Democrats lost in 1994. The other part was that Republicans based their campaign on Hillary, and not a single Republican incumbent lost.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/74

[ElsewheresDaughter]

9. Ignorance is the parent of your fear.. Hillary record is STRONG Obama is the weak BLANK SCREEN.....

compare the two

CBS’ For the Record News Series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHW0RzXe4DQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQxUov8F4v4

[hfojvt]

10. Did I or did I not say that the CBS puff piece sounded like an ad?

Why yes I did. Perhaps Katie Couric is endorsing Clinton. Do we now trust the M$M? They certainly whitewashed Hillary's support of the war and also weak support for SCHIP, which was worked on by Kennedy who asked for Hillary's support. He got it and it was crucial, but CBS makes it look like she invented it. Nevermind that Bill torpedoed SCHIP when Lott complained it would hurt the budget agreement. This at the same time, Clinton was proposing tax cuts which favored the wealthy.

[intaglio]

13. It is not my fear but your own I address

I do not fear Hillary or Obama, what I fear is the foolishness which is dividing this board. I do not question your belief in your candidate just the hatred that I see bred of fear, specifically the fear of failure. The only ignorance that can be parent to that fear is the ignorance of the capabilities of Democratic Party supporters to go out and seize this election.

[powergirl]

14. Didn't Yoda say that?

But you are right. Hope always trumps fear. Fear is what the Republicans will use. We are better than that.