Couple of things
- I've gotten a couple of emails regarding this post on Hillary Clinton, and I'll agree that I was rather blunt and perhaps a tad bit harsh in it. But please note that I didn't say I wouldn't vote for Clinton if she was up against any of the existing Republican candidates in the general election, but rather that I don't really care to. Again, I think she may very well win the general election later this year, but I think she damages the Democratic Party's chances to build a governing majority, just as her husband's presidency did in the 1990s.
- On the Obama Watch front (since we actually have a race now), he picked up the endorsement of the Culinary Union, which should bode well for his chances in Nevada. Also, Shirley Franklin endorsed him today, which is rather interesting. One has to think that her reference of Martin Luther King Jr. is in direct response to the Clinton campaign's comments about the civil rights icon a few days back.
- Well, 200-plus new taxes later, The Glenn Tax is taking some shots.
- I also said Clinton's tears weren't authentic, which I still believe. And that isn't to say they don't stem from a legitimate place, but the outrage over possibly criticizing them is absolutely insane. I've seen a number of Obama supporters, particularly female supporters, indicate that they're considering Clinton now based on her crying and Jesse Jackson Jr.'s criticism. While I can understand why this is something that shouldn't be pushed as strongly as Jackson Jr. did, it's insanity to vote for Clinton over this. If you think she's the best candidate based on her vision, policy proposals, etc., then by all means back her. But to support her because you feel bad that she cried is an insult to the process.
- On the Obama Watch front (since we actually have a race now), he picked up the endorsement of the Culinary Union, which should bode well for his chances in Nevada. Also, Shirley Franklin endorsed him today, which is rather interesting. One has to think that her reference of Martin Luther King Jr. is in direct response to the Clinton campaign's comments about the civil rights icon a few days back.
- Well, 200-plus new taxes later, The Glenn Tax is taking some shots.
- I also said Clinton's tears weren't authentic, which I still believe. And that isn't to say they don't stem from a legitimate place, but the outrage over possibly criticizing them is absolutely insane. I've seen a number of Obama supporters, particularly female supporters, indicate that they're considering Clinton now based on her crying and Jesse Jackson Jr.'s criticism. While I can understand why this is something that shouldn't be pushed as strongly as Jackson Jr. did, it's insanity to vote for Clinton over this. If you think she's the best candidate based on her vision, policy proposals, etc., then by all means back her. But to support her because you feel bad that she cried is an insult to the process.
posted by Jmac at 2:38 PM
4 Comments:
"On the Obama Watch front (since we actually have a race now), he picked up the endorsement of the Culinary Union, which should bode well for his chances in Nevada."
And for a few good meals, too :-)
Women voting for someone out of sympathy and emotional attraction rather than substantive analysis of their policies? Outrageous!
--Aristotle
I don’t think you where harsh. This is a tough time for the Democratic Party as old factions and newer constituencies start to really see each other’s differences. Good or bad, Clinton is a 60’s democrat and that by gone era defines much of her politics and those of many who support her. When I listened to some of her supporters in New Hampshire, they were not talking about ending the war or stopping the further disparity of wealth. Instead their core issue was abortion rights. Clinton is a democrat of yesteryear from a time when part of this country decided that they hate the other side and have waged constant, partisan war ever since. Obama is making headway because too many of us are tired of fighting yesterday’s battles when we have so many battles that need attention right now.
Clinton has a few excellent approaches on policy. The Washington post survey told me she was my candidate of choice. I know that if her policies were elected, they would serve America well. But her political baggage of divisiveness and a more stick than carrot approach is part of the polarization that so many of us are so tired of.
This country has been fighting itself for too long. It’s time we find common ground and solve the issues that need solving.
"damages the Democratic Party's chances to build a governing majority, just as her husband's presidency did . . ."
Maybe I missed something. Didn't Clinton *have* a governing majority upon election, only to lose it a few years into his presidency?
Post a Comment
<< Home