Arguments that should not be made here

[Donkey_Punch_Dubya]

I never chose sides in the primary, so I say this not as a biased supporter of Obama or Clinton, ut as a Democrat who desparately wants to win in Novermber. It seems like there is still some sniping from both sides after Hillary's concession speech. Some thought she would never concede, or would use vague language as code for her supporters. That seems unlikely given how it played out, so it seems like we should be united now after a tough, extended primary season. We need to fight John McCain, who will provide a legitimate foe in the GE. He is less conservative than Bush, and has some strengths that we all shouldn't dismiss. So, I think from here on, these follwing arguments that keep appearing on GDP should end and not crop up on GD-GE or whatever it's called.

1)Hillary won the popular vote. What? Why does this keep appearing? Looking at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html, the only way Hillary wins is by including MI with zero votes for Obama. This is not realistic. While it is technically true that "Hillary received more votes in the primaries", it is overly lawyerly and unrealistic to give Obama zero votes. Giving Hillary 56% of the vote and Obama 40% gives her an 84000 vote gain. But the popular vote is +152,000 for Obama before including MI, so in this case, which is pretty favorable to Sen. Clinton, Obama still wins by 68,000 votes. By favorable to Clinton, I mean there was no campaigning, which increased Obama's percentages in nearly every state, and that this January primary did not come after Obama's victories in the solid majority of state contests and was more influenced by name recognition, which favored the candidate with the same name as our last, popular Democratic president. This argument is dead and using it is divisive.

2)Saying anything about aggresiveness of Obama supporters is being a sore loser or a McCain fan. I think it's legitimate to ask the 5% of Obama supporters who attack Hillary and other dem supporters too often to cut back is not being a sore loser. I have fears that if some people act like the most offensive Obama supporters to independents, they will cost Obama votes. Obama is my candidate now, so this is protecting my hopes and candidate. Hillary has a similar 5-10% that keep attacking Obama in a divisive, offensive way. These people are only helping McCain, and deserve scorn on a Democratic site. But this does not translate into all, most, or the majority of people who backed Clinton or Obama, and should never be attributed to all or most. We shouldn't do this, and former Clinton supporters who are now in Obama's camp should not encourage or compliment people making this fringe anti-Obama argument.

Some of this boils down to the conversation between A and B: A says "Don't keep antagonizing Clinton, it hinders unity." B says "I'm not going to be help hostage by a bunch of whiners." This interchange has happened way too much. Making a request for courteousness is not the same as being held hostage or demanding lots of begging. I don't think anybody really wants longtime Obama supporters to say "Oh please, please, I beg of you to to vote for Barack. You are soooo neat and I want to kiss your ass for the next 5 months." Every time the repugs see this they are high fiving each other. Let's not give them that.

3)Sexism and racism had no effect on this primary. O rly? Why did 20% of voters on some states say race was very important to them, and why did some people think Obama is a black Muslim extremist despite all evidence? Why did the youtube video by the woman's group linked on DU show a bunch of garbage and higher standards directed toward hillary and other Dem women at times? They both had an effect. But neither were the reason why this race was won and lost. It's divisive to deny either, to put all the blame on winning/losing on these 2 issues, or to claim one but deny the other.

4)Barack Obama is not qualified to be President. This is one of the few things McCain thinks he is better on, so repeating this is helping McCain and repeating a GOP meme. W. Bush was governor of Texas for 6 years. I live in Austin, TX, and I tell you the TX governorship is probably the biggest figurehead position of all governors. There is little responsibility, and W worked with a Republican majority and thus almost never had to work bipartisanly to convince the other party of his ideas. But there was little to zero talk of him being unqualified in 2000. Obama has 4 years in the senate and 10-15 years in the state legislature. Clinton has more overall experience, but Obama is more qualified than 5 or 6 presidents in the last 100 years at least, and will have a cabinet and staff that provide a huge wealth of real experience (not Bush's loyalty. This argument has not good purpose.

5)Hillary is not a Democrat, is sending secret messages to vote against Obama, is as bad or worse than Bush. People fall in love in the primaries, and Obama is someone who you easily fall in love with. He's awesome. But the side effect is the demonization of any democratic opponent as much worse than reality, especially if they attack your favorite. Yes, she did some regretable things in the primary, and maybe waged a dirty campaign at times. But her "kitchen sink" strategy was nowhere near what we will see in the GE from GOP swiftboaters, and is not worse than Rove/Bush. It didn't destroy our party. Bill Clinton may not have been ideal from a progressive point of view, but he was the best president since the 60s. He is not evil and Hillary is not evil. It doesn't help us if we keep stirring up emotions with attacks that are subjective instead of objective. Nobody is saying we have to baby and coddle Hillary fans. Hillary fans launching attacks on Obama should have a zero-tolerance policy, but the converse should have a low tolerance. This doesn't mean someone is telling you you can't say anything critical of Hillary if she does something truly deserving of it, it means starting a thread that blinking and pauses in a clear concession speech really means she is sending coded messages to oppose Obama should have no place. Despite her IWR vote, Hillary has been a good democrat in the Senate by any objective measurement, so she shouldn't be vilified as the worst person in public life.

I'll end this with a quote from the most hilarious right winger, Eric Cartman from South Park, in the World of Warcraft episode:

Cartman (having a meeting about the Warcraft bully who's killing them): ...If we all log in together, we might have a chance against him.

Jimmy:Hey yeah, we can really stick it to that ass m-m-munch.

Clyde: Are you guys dumb? We can't beat him, even with all of us! It's a waste of time.

Stan: Dude, we have to try.

Clyde: I've got better things to do.

Cartman:Clyde! Clyde! If you had a chance, right now, to go back in time and stop Hitler, wouldn't you do it? I mean, I personally wouldn't stop him because I think he was awesome. But you would, right?

Clyde: I'm just going to stop playing.

Cartman: When Hitler rose to power there were a lot of people who just stopped playing. You know who those people were, Clyde? The French. Are you French, Clyde?

Clyde: No.

Cartman: Vous le vous couche avec moi, Clyde?

Clyde: All right, all right, I'll do it!


Cartman's manipulation wins again, but we won't be manipulated this election, will we? We won't let the GOP sit back and smile while we attack each other and threaten to not vote Democratic. Hell no, because Obama is a great man, a great candidate, a great Democrat, a great speaker and he will lead this country out of the hell we are in with Bush. HELL YEAH!

[Forkboy]

1. If someone breaks out the "Chewbacca Defense" I'm outta here!

:D