With the GOP nomination set, I'll be participating in Virginia's Democratic primary tomorrow. I will be voting for Obama.I've given many reasons why I oppose Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Let's review:
She's as secretive as Dick Cheney. Her single managerial effort in the White House was the crafting of health care reform policy. It was done in secret. In fact, documents from her effort are still embargoed from public view.
She didn't read the complete threat estimate before voting to allow George Bush to take us to war in Iraq (un.fucking.forgivable). It's not that she voted to go to war, it's that she didn't do her job.
Then there is the drama of the Clinton marriage.
I oppose the dynastic presidency on principal. And in the Clinton's case I think their candidacy (it's two for one after all) is in violation of the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.
There's the Clinton's record of corruption.
There is the fact that the Clintons signed DOMA into law; signed by a serial adulterer no less.
There is the way the Clintons have handled the campaign. Theirs is the Lee Atwater/ Karl Rove win-at-all-costs-even-if-it-hurts-the- party-and-the-country campaign strategy. From floating memos alleging Obama to be a Muslim, to dredging up his youthful drug abuse (at least he admitted to it, as opposed to copping the "I did not inhale" lie), to the casting of Obama as a "Black" candidate in the mold of Jesse Jackson, Mrs. Clinton has engaged in the politics of personal destruction.
And then there is her brazen attempt to steal the delegates in Michigan and Florida, where she, like the other candidates, pledged not to campaign. Yet she, unlike the others, neglected to remove her name from the ballot in those states. Of course she got the plurality on votes. And like a staged Bush Administration press conference, Clinton held a "victory" party after her "win" in Florida. And now she wants to steal those delegates.
You can certainly debate the merits of the DNC's move. What is beyond debate, though, is that all the major Democratic campaigns accepted this move without complaint. Clinton, along with her rivals, signed a pledge not to "participate" in the Michigan and Florida primaries.
But as soon as it became clear, in the wake of Iowa and on the eve of South Carolina, that Clinton potentially faced an extended battle for delegates, she began to demand that the rules be changed in the middle of the game. Her campaign has been arguing that the non-contested elections in Michigan and Florida should be made retroactively meaningful--and, therefore, that Clinton should be handed a gift of nearly 200 delegates. The Clinton team has wrapped its case in the logic of voter disenfranchisement. "I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee," Clinton has said.
There is a perfectly cogent case to be made that Floridians and Michiganders deserve their say. (Some of our best friends and elderly relatives reside in those states.) The way to address this complaint is to schedule new elections so that candidates can advertise, make speeches, organize voters, distribute yard signs--you know, do "democracy," a concept Clinton seems not to understand. The DNC, if it does decide to redress Clinton's complaint, needs to do so immediately.
The New Republic hasn't endorsed any candidate in this race. Our staff is divided, like the Democratic electorate.
But neutral observers can't stand idly by as one campaign openly discusses stealing the nomination at the convention. Democrats need to recognize this potential gambit for what it is: a cynical, selfish hijacking of the democratic process. Clinton would not be laying the groundwork for this ploy unless it was potentially decisive. And the damage to Democrats (and democrats) would be profound. If Clinton is truly willing to trample so many institutions she professes to care about in pursuit of victory, she will have proven her enemies correct.
The New Republic (emphasis mine)
Hillary Clinton is unscrupulous to the core.
Tomorrow I'll outline why I'll be supporting Obama in the primary.
7 comments:
Tell us how ya really think, Trop ... ; -).
Good luck tomorrow!
If Obama is elected say hello to President McCain. The republicans will destroy him with ease. The middle name of Hussein is enough to beat him in the general election.
Say what you will about Hillary but she is a fighter and she has the best chance of winning in November. Don't bother quoting polls that have Obama winning over McCain. The republican smear machine has not started on Obama. All smears on Hillary are just old news at this point and will not be effective.
I have never understood why some women hate Hillary so much.
People dislike/ hate Hillary Clinton so much because she's *earned* it.
Yes, I know the Right will do their best to conjure up fear of Obama. Already few among the Right wing punditry can talk about Obama as simply "Obama;" it is always "Barack *HUSSEIN* Obama." The GOP *is* the party of fear and bigotry, I have no doubt about that.
The GOP attack machine will go after either candidate, to be sure. With Hillary, however, the attacks will stick-- all of them. With Obama, the GOP will be exposed for the dark underbelly politics they practice (just like the Clintons were exposed -and rejected- in SC). Fairly or not, Sen. Obama has Teflon, and the GOP knows it.
That's why the GOP wants Hillary in it. They need her in it to win it; and win it they will if she gets the nomination.
Also, Hillary Clinton is a victim of her own hubris.
She thought she had this one in the bag; that the primaries were merely a formality to her coronation. Now that they realize she may never close the deal, her mismanaged campaign staff is starting to drop out.
We've already suffered through seven disastrous years of hubris in the White House. We don't need four more.
The Republicans are too busy destroying each other this election cycle. Hillary, sad to say, seems to be intent on destroying herself. Barrack Hussein Obama (::eyeroll::) can defend himself. Certainly he can run a better campaign than either McCain or Clinton can.
And, whether or not he can beat McCain is rather what the point of the entire election may well be about.
I don't understand why -- when someone objects to Hillary on substantive issues -- it seems to bring a rather knee-jerk accusation of "woman-hating" (or the like). It's about as intelligent as assuming that the average American find someone's middle name offputting.
Hillary Clinton has definitely *earned* my intense dislike, and perhaps more important, my intense disrespect, says this Arkansas native.
*************
Not every dyke in the country thinks a McCain presidency would be a totally horrible thing. *ahem* {ducking the tomatoes}
**************
And just as a relatively unimportant side note, I know for a fact that there is a fairly large conservative following who are voting for Hillary in the primaries, BECAUSE they view her as the more beatable candidate in the GE.
Yes, GM, my observations exactly.
I laid out a cogent argument giving specific points on why I won't vote for Hillary. Yet, I get the "Hillary Derangement Syndrome" diagnosis. Come on! Take each of my points and explain why ANYONE would want Sen. Clinton in the White House.
She completely mismanaged health care reform, setting it back decades, and she has clearly mismanaged her campaign (much to the country's benefit, IMHO).
Say whatever you will about Barack Obama (he's WAY too liberal for my tastes, honestly), he's managed a very successful campaign against the inevitable Senator Clinton.
Post a Comment