Monday, October 06, 2008

I am not a bitter, ignorant, racist, old dried-up feminist cat-lady

There are two schools of thought, either there are a good number of former supporters of Hillary Clinton who are voting for John McCain or there are scores of Republicans on the internet pretending to be former Clinton supporters who are going to vote for John McCain.

I know personally that these supporters exist, both male and female, who state they can not vote for Obama under any circumstance.

For those of you who have missed all of the reasons "why" this one post, Clinton Supporters Never Say Die is one you might want to read, especially if you read the 140 comments. It's in the comments where statements like the title of this post can be found. You'll see some Obama supporters make threats, some state that those not voting for Obama must be Republicans and you'll see a variety of men and women who say they were Clinton supporters stating why they are not voting for Obama along with some who are stating why they are. Some of the comments are angry, some are not.

I recommend reading the piece and the comments, but some examples from each mindset:
Obama is simply not qualified for the position he seeks. Clinton was. Those Clinton supporters shifting their support to McCain/Palin are doing so because they represent the centrist middle ground of this country and will likely accomplish more good than Mr. Obama could ever hope for. It's a question of competence, experience, and an ability to get the job done. It's time to drop this foolish voting based strictly on the party line. These people are not leaving the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party has left them.

The operative word in this article is RNC. The 11% for McCain and supposely was for Clinton before are liers. Most likely, Rush's listeners. If you are for Clinton, there is no way you are for Palin. Very different views on all issues. Also, if Mc/P are elected, there will no longer be a chance for Clinton whether they did a good job with the country or otherwise. If good, Mc/P would continue for 8 years, if bad, no one would vote for a woman any more. So, do not be fool. Those who said they were for Clinton and now for Palin are closet republicans.

I would hope that women who supported Hillary and all Democrats would stick together and vote Obama into the White House. You do remember her speech at the convention? The Obama/Biden ticket is what we have whatever your feelings about the Obama - Hillary primary. What we are voting for are Democratic principles. Of all elections, this one will count in terms of the direction our country is heading. If you can rise above your disappointment and support Obama, then in 2012 we can decide whether to replace him with HIllary if she still wants it. I cannot imagine the alternative under a McCain/Palin ticket. Please keep your eyes on the issues this year. For your children, for your country and for our planet.

For all the supposed "Hillary Supporters" who cannot vote for Barrack, keep this in mind: Hillary will never win, not now, not in 2012, not in 2016 without the Black vote. If you sabbotage Barrack's chance, we will never forgive you...ever.

All you Obama people on here, especially the AA's that threaten not to vote for Hillary if Obama loses. It will not be Hillary's fault, nor will it be her supporters fault if he loses. Have you checked out his record,(he doesn't have one) you have no actual idea of what went on in the caucuses, you have no idea of the deal that was cut during the break of the RBC committee meeting, you have no actual idea of what went on with the roll call vote at the convention, you are listening to the media and believing everything they say about the annointed one, and yes he was annointed. You had to have actually been involved in the process, not just out here blogging. As an elected officer of the Democratic Party, I assure you that there were things that went on, that if you were really a true Democrat you would be outraged over too. This is not a matter of the Democratic Candidate, this is a matter of retaking the REAL Democratic party back. These people in control of our party now, are not the Democrats who really stood for the rights of all Americans, they are just out for themselves and control of our country. This beyond Hillary Clinton, we have passed that stage, now we are fighting for actual Democracy.

The misspelling of Barack's name and any other grammar errors are from the comments as directly taken.


The News Writer said...

While I completely understand and respect the feelings/opinions of those Hillary supporters who say they can't or won't support Obama in any way and/or will vote for McCain, I can't help but be alarmed. A McCain/Palin administration would be disastrous for this country, and I can't say it any plainer than that.

I saw so much ugliness in the Democratic primary campaign, largely coming from Obama supporters, that I stopped reading anything on Kos, DU and a host of other sites. It wasn't worth the stress level. I kept wondering where those people came from. They weren't the progressives I thought I knew.

I don't believe for a second that the disaffected Hillary supporters are really Republicans in disguise. But I am not convinced that a large part of the primary ugliness wasn't perpetuated by Republican operatives whose game plan was to sow seeds of divisiveness. It would be such a Rovian thing to do, and would not surprise me at all.

But this election is critical. I just don't think the country can bear another 4 years of reckless GOP rule -- and know that John McCain is quite reckless. And the prospects of a Sarah Palin a heartbeat away are even more terrifying.

I'm well aware that a president can't set policy all by himself. Well, actually, that's been happening for the past 7 1/2 years. But a president does set a tone -- and a president does carry a veto pen.

It breaks my heart to see such anger and vitriol. And it scares the bejesus out of me to think that there are people whose opinions and thoughts I hold a great deal of respect for might actually be working to elect a president who believes in absolutely nothing they do. It's the ultimate in voting against your best interests, but then, the Republicans have been very good at convincing people to do that for a very long time.

I could list dozens of reasons a McCain-Palin administration would be devastating, beginning with a continuation of the same "save the rich" economic policies that Ronald Reagan set into motion in the 1980s.

The Supreme Court is another, and Roe v. Wade is just one of a number of issues. More important that a single issue, though, is that a McCain or Obama presidency will be the difference between a conservate court and a more centrist court for decades. The justices most likely to step down are all liberal. Who gets to replace those justices is a critical issue, because the remaining, conservative judges are much younger and will likely keep their seats on the bench for a long time. Whether the idea of Roe being overturned concerns you or not, the specter of any number of decisions falling to a very conservative court for the foreseeable future should.

War. Ready to go into Iran? If W doesn't do it before he leaves office, McCain surely will. He is a warrior. Period.

I have plenty of issues with Democrats. I have plenty of issues with Obama. I have plenty of issues with Biden. But I have a heckuva lot more issues with Republicans, McCain and Palin.

All the reasons "why" are valid ones. And if I didn't see this election as so very critical, I'd be right there. But I can't do it. I can't help a ticket get elected that I believe will further degrade the standard of living for people who don't make millions. I just can't do it.

Kvatch said...

Have to agree with the previous commenter, and I was a Clinton supporter.

McCain has promised us 10 more years of war. He has, in effect, promised us another $1T in debt. He has promised to keep the ruinous fiscal policies of Bu$hCo in place--another $1T in debt. He has put an unqualified hypocrite on the GOP ticket. He has assured us that he will not put in place a coherent energy policy, and has promised a health plan that will see 20M more Americans without health care by the end of his administration.

All this Obama vs. Clinton supporter nonsense is just b*llshit posturing. No matter how many unknowns Obama presents us with, McCain has told us exactly what he will do, and it should scare every single American.

Lisa Renee said...

Both of you raise valid points, if you believe that one candidate will really do anything different. I do understand those who are tired of the way they feel their party has been run and for them, this is their line in the sand moment.

Then there are those who have given up, to them, neither candidate is going to end the war, the war will continue and the troops that are in Iraq will be moved to Afghanistan. The threat of war with Iran and hostilities with Pakistan are even more possible under Obama than McCain, which is scary to think about.

Neither candidate is going to address the health care issue. It's been raised as a campaign issue since before I even began voting in 1978.

The economy...If you believe the president is responsible for a good or a bad economy then that could motivate a vote for Obama, yet realistically neither man will have the kind of impact that Congress has on the economy.

Every four years we are like anxious car buyers looking to see where we can get the best deal, facing slick used car salesman that can convince us of not the truth but what we want to hear. We don't want honesty, else the whole health care issue would have been addressed years ago. In our current economic climate most of the things both of these candidates are promising are not going to happen.

So, we are left with smaller things like college education, which again still relies on Congress. What is the real basis of a decision as to who to vote for? What can a president actually do? We know what they are blamed for or given credit for that they really didn't have much of an impact on.

That's the whole "it really doesn't matter" argument. Then there is the do you want to reward someone that you believe cheated argument, which some Clinton supporters have expressed.

Then there are those who look at the gender issue, which they feel is just as important.

I could go on, but the main point is that these people who are not voting for Obama, most of them have what they feel are very valid reasons why they can not vote for him. Rather than unite, there has been quite a bit of the continuing ugliness continuing.

I think you give the republicans too much credit in stirring this up news writer, it seems pretty clear from what I've seen that the Democratic Party has managed to do this all on their own.

I think that perhaps in the rush for the ego trip of being able to have one of the "historic firsts" our party forgot what they were supposed to be about. I've never seen so many Democrats so un-enthused about a candidate, it's worse than when Kerry ran. Some do seem to accept the "okay, Obama is marginally better than McCain" argument. Yet when you have County Party chairs telling people that it's okay to not vote for President or to vote third party just to please vote down ticket...We have a huge problem that very few want to admit exists.

Ironically, the polls show Obama gaining, but there is not that energy or excitement where people actually feel there is a chance for real change to happen that equals those poll increases.

Despite the message of hope that the Obama campaign tried to drive home, what is lacking right now in the minds and the hearts of these people is hope and trust, most of them never believed in Obama and nothing has changed to inspire them to think differently. A good many of the Obama supporters have actually turned people off rather than on...Now will some of these people at that very moment of having voted Democrat their entire adult lives not be able to vote Republican? It's possible...

The News Writer said...

Believe me, I think the reasons why are quite valid. I completely understand, and hope I don't present my opinion in any way to denigrate the people who hold those reasons and make the choices they're going to make.

I don't think the president alone has a huge effect on things. But a president and a veto pen do. The Democrats currently in Congress have decided not to push this president to veto legislation constantly. The Democrats in the Senate have decided not to force the Republicans to actually filibuster the bills they don't like. But those two things -- the president's veto and lack of super majority in the Senate -- really screw with Congress. I think there is a significant chance of getting some better bills through Congress without the threat of a presidential veto.

I don't believe "it really doesn't matter." I don't believe we'd be in this horrendous shape after 8 years of a Gore administration instead of a Bush administration. We may not have gotten everything we wanted, but we'd be a far sight better than we are now.

And that's what I believe now. We won't get everything we want. True progressives (and I don't mean the ones who pretended they were while being so insulting and ugly during the primary and after), but true progressives are pretty far beyond the curve. It's frustrating, to be sure. But we're visionaries, in a sense. The "mainstream" is always going to be somewhat behind us (until years later, when the next round of progressives zooms past us).

I've seen progressive friends become nearly constant targets not only for those on the right, but for those on the left who aren't there yet. It's not pretty, and it's very difficult. And the temptation to draw a line in the sand is there, every single day. So is the temptation to give up.

I had that moment in '92, when I so didn't want to vote for Bill Clinton because I thought he was a scumbag and way too moderate. A letter from Barbara Jordan changed my mind, and I'm glad. Bill wasn't the best president we could have had, and he certainly wasn't what I wanted. But he was far better than another 4 years of George Bush.

The stakes are even higher now after 8 years of George Jr.

To be honest, I believe we're getting very close to one of those breakthrough moments when there's a paradigm shift in perceptions, when progressive values -- at least some of them -- become mainstream. Proponents of conservative, regressive values always dig in harder and squeal louder as that shift gets closer to fruition. But it is inevitable.

The choice then, as we get ever closer to that moment, is do we want the president to be someone who is at least receptive to progressive ideas or someone who is at the forefront of trying to halt progress?

That's an easy choice for me.

Lisa Renee said...

I don't think anyone would take issue with what you've written, I know others that have reached the same conclusion you have and those who it's not an easy choice for.

Jason R. said...

I've just begun posting why this Clinton Democrat will be voting for John McCain this time around.

Anonymous said...

I'm confused as to how Hillary as first lady translates into "experience" to qualify her for the presidency. Doesn't she have merely her almost 8 years in the US senate as her only elected office?

Or maybe all the Hillary crowd counts her years on the Wal-Mart board of directors as relevant experience?

Lisa Renee said...

Then you must not think very much of Obama's experience anonymous...

The News Writer said...

For some, ignorance really is bliss, LisaRenee.

Lisa Renee said...

Yes, but they are entertaining NewsWriter, and what's sad is that is supposed to get me all "riled up" instead? I chuckle.


The News Writer said...

Yeah, I like a good laugh now and then too.

Robin said...

There is nothing like politics that bring out the absolute silliness and hatefullness in people.

The News Writer said...

Well, maybe religion. But yeah.

Scott G said...

I have a problem with people saying Obama was anointed. Senator Clinton was anointed, she just thought that was enough and began to fight for the nomination too late. I do not believe she lost because she is a woman or because the media or liberals wanted Obama more, I think it was because they got arrogant and lazy and let Obama beat them on the ground.

I am also not a big fan of the experience argument. Either you are a good leader or you are not. Abraham Lincoln could not get elected today. It helps to have an understanding of government and the world, but I think being rational and observant is much more important