Thanks for letting us know that you are a Clinton supporter. Its' all good, now I have a better understanding of why you demand party loyalty as well as banning folks from speaking.
Or maybe Ron Paul, who understands about them colored folk.
ROFL.
You owe me for a new keyboard, dammit! I just sprayed a mouthful of diet cran-raspberry juice all over my old one.
Obama ain't getting nowhere near a ticket with Clinton, whether he's the nominee or not. Not with Bill Clinton sitting on Bill Richardson's balls as they watch the Super Bowl.
Bet you they get Richardson as Veep in more pandering to the Latino vote.
MoDo had a little squib 2/3 about what really happened between Obama and Clinton on the tarmac getting to the next debate during the Shaheen/Kerrey sliming. I may have been late to reading about this, but Dowd's piece told me everything that I needed to know about Hillary.
In front of her plane, Hillary apologized to her rival about
Shaheen. Obama replied that he was concerned at the pattern of
insinuations and attacks from her supporters and that a message
needed to be sent from the top that sharp attacks were not, as
Hillary had put it, “the fun part.” He brought up another recent
example: the Clinton volunteer in Iowa who had been asked to
leave after forwarding sleazy e-mail falsely claiming that Obama
was a Muslim.
Then, according to witnesses from the Obama camp, Hillary got
very agitated and was “flapping her arms.” All her simmering
grievances spilled out during the 10-minute talk. She was still
furious about David Geffen’s searing interview with [Dowd] the
previous February, charging that she and Bill lie with such ease
“it’s troubling.” While Geffen’s fund-raiser for Obama spurred
the column, Obama knew nothing about the interview until it
appeared. Hillary was also angry that Obama had called her
“disingenuous,” telling Newsweek that it was a contradiction for
her to claim that her tenure as first lady gave her more
experience but then refuse to release her first lady papers from
Bill’s library, saying she had no control over them.
At some point, an Obama intimate recalled, he “gently put his
hand on her arm to chill her out.” The tall senator often leans
down to put a friendly hand on the shoulder of his fellow
senators — male and female — on the Senate floor, and they seem
charmed by the gesture.
But Senator Clinton and her circle were not. They had been
surprised and troubled by what they saw as his attempt to grab
her arm and hold her in place while they talked, an unpleasant
flashback to Rick Lazio getting in her space. As Queen Bee of
the Clinton hive, Hillary has created a regal force field that
can be breached only with permission, so something that wasn’t
even a jostle was perceived as a joust.
The encounter seemed to have steeled them both. Hillary, to
knock back the upstart who had unexpectedly gotten in her way,
and Obama, who came away feeling that, for all of Hillary’s
outer strength, she was afraid of him in some ways, and for all
of her supposed poise, she had a more spiky temperament than he
had realized.
Spiky?
All Obama's numbers look better than hers against McCain.
Is this the change we are looking for when we finally return to the White House?
Unity, my ass. Obama's coming to Wisconsin; and I am going to try and see him if he comes to Mad City, hopefully not on a school day. And fling my paltry $20 into the fray.
We get it jesse you love hillary....better hope that there is a mirical then. if it s hillary mccain then mccain wins.
It would be nice if you came out and where open with your support for mthe beginning, but hey it was reaatehr clear to most of us.
you are rigth with one point, it is the republicans we are fighting...I jsut rememebr to fight the republicans that put a D after their name.
Jesse Wendel,
I disagree with your assertion that Clinton has nowhere to go but up and Obama has nowhere to go but down. In fact, I think it is quite the opposite.
Opinions on Hillary Clinton ossified somewhere over a decade ago and her name recognition is nearly 100 percent. People know who Hillary is, they think they know what she stands for, and are very divided on her.
Barack Obama's support is far more fluid and growing. The media line out of the Hillary camp seems to be that Hillary won the states that mattered- California, New York, and New Jersey. And there is no doubt that winning those states with their large amount of delegates is important, but her margins of victory in those states was much smaller than Obama's cleaning her clock in the mid-level states. I mean what happened to Hillary in Kansas? She lost that state by 50 points. 2-1 in Minnesota. 2-1 in Illinois. 2-1 in Georgia. 4-1 in Idaho. These states have significantly less delegates than California and New York, but the massive differential is what is bringing the delegate count in at about the same.
If Hillary wants to win this nomination she is going to have to push a media narrative that she can push past the rest of the states having elections this month(which she will likely not win) or find a way to get a win out of a Washington or a Louisiana. The South for her was a push, but she is losing badly in the Western plains + Rockies states and the upper Midwest, and her loss in Connecticut hurt her the most in her being able to claim a solid Northeast.
Though Hillary doesn't have the elected experience that she is often credited for, she is a veteran campaigner, and she will need all that skill in order to win this nomination. She can push a narrative that Obama can't win big states that matter in a general election and use that to help her to Texas and/or Ohio in early March, but in the meantime her campaign will have to weather the storm. Vote differential is the most important least discussed issue in these primary campaigns and it will hold the day as to who is nominated and who is left behind.
Thanks for letting us know that you are a Clinton supporter.
Give it a rest, tenacitus.
IMHO, Jesse is afraid of the same thing that I am.
He's afraid that if Hillary does get the nod, there'll be a lot of chowder heads amongst the Dems who will not do the ugly deed at hand and vote for Hillary.
They'll cross the line and "protest vote" for McCain, or they'll conveniently forget that RP is a 50s Bircher rather than a libertarian of any sort, and they'll vote for him. By that time, RP will be in Phase 2, where he runs as an indy.
I think you know my opinion of Hillary, and who I support. Jesse may have been keeping mum, but I sure haven't.
But if Hillary wins the nomination, I'm going to down a couple of tabs of Dramamine, then vote for Hillary. I'll have to do that job on an empty stomach. But I'll do it.
Because we have to win this thing. Not "win" in the larger strategic sense, because that's no longer possible and may never have been. But "win", as in, delay what's coming for as long as we can.
That's not going to happen if a Republican, ANY Republican, captures the White House again in 2008.
There seem to be press reports that the Hispanic vote is Hillary's ace in the sleeve. Break down those demographics state by state and you will see that there are widely differing percentages just as there is for white vote for Obama in southern versus northern/western states.
Hell look at there core constiuants..mccain and hillary both rely on teh geriatric crowd...they spilt that vote. the young wont show up for hillary, adn mccain wins.
Finally, Obama does not have the Latino or Asian vote. Or the female vote. Not to say many women aren't voting for him. But many more women are voting for Clinton. And overwhelmingly, Asians and Latinos are voting for Clinton.
Yes that's true but we are talking about a Democratic primary. Is there reason to believe that Obama couldn't win those folks over in a general election?
I believe if Hillary is nominated she will lose to McCain. He will absolutely bludgeon her on the war issue and in even if the religious nuts abandon him I think he can pull enough independents and disgruntled Dems (yes unfortunately that's what we are headed toward) to maybe make up for their lack of votes.
And the last reason she won't win is the irrational hatred that many have for her. We Americans are a spiteful fucking bunch and many people would vote for rabid squirrel than Hillary. I'm sorry about that fact as much as the rest of you but that's the truth.
I also think Obama can win.
My analysis made with a hell of a hangover.
Feb 9 - Washington (D caucuses) - Hill wins by 10
Feb 10 - Maine (D caucuses)- Obama wins if for no other reason than Hillary will focus more on WA.
February 12 - District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia - Hillary gets the living shit beaten out of her. Too many black folks for her to win.
February 19: Hawaii (D)and Wisconsin -Obama of course wins Hawaii BIG. I'll give him Wisconsin too. I thnk the midwest relates to Obama better than Hill.
March 4 - Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont - The money Hillary has will determine these races. I am not going to say that Obama will win a big state like Texas or Ohio but even if he loses it will be close. RI and VT Obama wins because Hill would rather have the big states.
March 8 - Wyoming (D)- How is the delegate count by now? Is Obama still lurching behind Hillary, with her unable to outrun him like some mummy in one of those old monster movies.
How's Hillary's money? I think she shows up and it ends up a split.
March 11 - Mississippi - Hillary gets her ass kicked again.
April 22 - Pennsylvania - How much can Rendell's endorsement help Hillary? Who has the mo? I think Obama can make this closer but Hllary will win.
May 6 - Indiana and North Carolina - Obama wins NC. Indiana I'm not sure of. I'm going to be completely ignorant and talk out my ass about a state I've only flown over but how racist is Indiana at his point in it's history? Two words: Klan headquarters. I'm not sure about Indiana so I'm not going to predict anything. 
I'm going to stop here because I need to take something to make the horrible throbbing in my head stop.
But I'll finish this later.
Oh and another thing while I wash these pill down. Those folks she didn't even bother to see WILL remember that slight in November.
How is she going to respond to McCain's attack that she doesn't give dman about the folks in Idaho or Minnesota because she couldn't be bothered to simply drop by in February.
Her non-caucus strategy will come back to hurt her.
Stormcrow hillary dosen't delay what is coming much...slwoign down the rate of acceleration is nto the same as stopeing..you are still headed towards the brickwall, you are still headed towards taht wall at a faster adn faster speed.
You're right about one thing baltogeek - money and how much the Clinton campaign has left in its coffers will play a great role in what happens from here on in. Obama will have dollars flowing in from small money donors while many of Hillary's contributors, Big Bux Billy types, have maxed out what they can give. Bill is going to have sniff out many a loot-laden groin over the few weeks a to months in order to keep his Mistress (and I mean this just way it looks) in her position of dominance.
I just wrote a bigun out for Obama. Do it Buzz Lightyear style Bro' - "To Infinity & Beyond!!!"
tenacitus & moonglum, and a number of others... (Take what applies to you; don't take what doesn't apply to you. I'm trying to solve a problem, not cause one.)
I'm not trying to pick a fight with either of you here, but both of you have accused me of saying one thing while lying about it. Unless you can prove that, don't do it again. I don't lie. Not to a traffic cop, not to my friends and family, and not here at GNB. That isn't to say I won't every make a mistake, or that you have the right to know every aspect of my life, but what I do tell you, will always be truthful as I understand the truth.
I don't know who I'm voting for. Other bloggers at GNB do. I don't. GNB isn't saying who any of us are voting for, on purpose. But I don't know who I am voting for. I am genuinely torn between Obama and Clinton, neither of whom were my first choice.
In the meantime, being called a liar by Obama supporters, and told I'm in the bag for Clinton, and having some of GNB's readers scared away from the comment threads by what they consider overly aggressive anti-Hillary comments, isn't helping. It's hurting readership and part of my job as Publisher is to increase readership.
Another part of my job is to make GNB a safe place for everyone, always, which is what it is designed to be. Including for supporters of Obama, and for supporters of Clinton.
I dislike banning people. I dislike scolding people. I'm not cut-out to play the stern father role. I'm a medic, not a cop. Doesn't mean I can't do it, but it isn't my natural style.
Y'all are the people who live in comments here. This is your home. Please figure out a way to make this a safe space for everyone, including people who support Hillary Clinton, along with the people who support Barack Obama, so everyone feels safe to say who they are for without getting jumped on or told how full of crap they are and why they are wrong and how could they possibly do such a stupid thing as be for so and so!
Talk among yourselves. And stop taking shots at me. I'm really sick of it.
balltogeek -
Feel better. Nice to see you doing analysis. *smiles*
Stormcrow -
I disagree (politely, of course) with Mr. Wendel. In a debate between Clinton and McCain, McCain will take it. She just doesn't have the ammunition that Obama could fight McCain with. And there is too much ammo that McCain could use against her to convince the public to vote for him.
I absolutely agree that we MUST win this. This country really won't survive 4 more years of R rule. And PLEASE DEAR GOD, do not let Huckabee be McCain's running mate...
A history lesson and an observation.
RE:
"Do you see why Huckleberry Lawrd'd his way through the south, and Romes never had a flipping chance? Huck's people ran those dirty fucking heretics (many of them immigrants from Lord knows where, dirt poor with their filthy diseases, taking jobs away from hard working Americans) out of Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois 170+ years ago? Damned if it can't be done again, and god-damned if Romeo boy with Jesus only knows how many wives is getting any votes from any good honest self-righteous true Americans. Yes sir. Our votes are going to Huck."
This part is the history lesson. Joseph Smith and the Mormons were run out of those places by the federal authorities, not by religious bigots. Smith and his people were in open rebellion to the United States. They raised their own militia. They printed their own money. They declared themselves above Constitutional law. That is why they ended up in Utah.
This part is the observation.
The reason why Romney is unacceptable to Evangelicals is because the modern LDS church is an aggressive, proselytizing religion. Just like modern Evangelism. Evangelical Christians fight the LDS church over converts. This is missionary trench warfare, and the biggest weapon in the Evangelical Christian arsenal is the perception of the LDS church as a fringe religion or cult.
If the President of the U.S. is a Mormon, that suddenly gives the LDS church an air of legitimacy it has never possessed. This is a recruiting tool of unimaginable potency on a global scale. Even Romney as the GOP nominee provides leverage. There's no way the Evangelical Christians will give them that sort of recruiting tool.
This is the economics of religious conversion. It's amazing to me that Limbaugh and other Romney supporters cannot see this and do not understand how much Romney alienates the Christian base.
Jesse,
R u serious. Hell I'm an Obama supporter didn't think he'd do so well on Super Tuesday.
Just thought he needed to keep it close.
This was the WORST night for Clinton. She LOST ground among all demographics except for the old folks and that includes Latinos and women.
A week ago the Clinton camp was talking how Super Tuesday would be a death blow for Obama. They thought they'd have the nomination locked up.
Obama momentum dead? Hillary rising?
Come on dude. Really?
"And the last reason she won't win is the irrational hatred that many have for her. We Americans are a spiteful fucking bunch and many people would vote for rabid squirrel than Hillary. I'm sorry about that fact as much as the rest of you but that's the truth."
-She probably try to be Republican-lite vs. McCain...and she'll lose.
Admiral Komack proabably...proabably. she is republican lite...tehn again so is he.
so what we come down to is an election with two republican lite canadates. teh public will vote for the one with the balls to put a R after his name.
The hard core I would vote for musilini if he had a D after his name are far outnumbered by the hard core I would vote for Chei Guvara if he had an R crowd. No one osueside the Dme faithful will vote for hillary, no oen outside the reublican faithfull will vote R they have more faithfull then you do...and you know who you can tahnk for taht...why Mr Clinton and his blue dog, DLC crowd pushing the dems further adn further right.
Steve knew this and talked abotu it over adn over...no one wants to vote for republican lite, it is allways a loseing stratagy. allways.
It's amazing to me that Limbaugh and other Romney supporters cannot see this and do not understand how much Romney alienates the Christian base.
Nice observation, GRT. I wonder if it's a case of they "cannot see" v. pretend they "cannot see".
"There seem to be press reports that the Hispanic vote is Hillary's ace in the sleeve."
Damn right it is. Hispanics aren't so fond of blacks (all you have to do is ask them). Oh the irony....
Damn right it is. Hispanics aren't so fond of blacks (all you have to do is ask them). Oh the irony....
Really so I guess my Latino friends that I've known for years have just been playing me.
Seriously can we stop this Latinos hate blacks crap.
Just because Latinos heavily voted for Hillary doesn't mean that there is a racist pattern to their vote.
Maybe just maybe they make up their minds on issues the way the rest of us do and believe Hillary be the better president.
The Latinos hate blacks meme, another reason I dislike Hillary and her campaign.
Jesse,
I am sorry that it appeared that I thought you were lying. I have also no idea who I would vote for in the primaries, yesterday during my caucus I spent half an hour trying to pick either Hillary or Obama, there things I like about both of them and while some of their positions are strong negatives for me. I ended up voting uncomitted since none of the candidates I wanted was on the ballot.
I had the opportunity to see Senator Clinton in Minneapolis on Sunday, I agreed with everything she said except for Iraq, her comments about Iraq were completely the opposite of my views.
I also got to shake her hand and was very happy to hear no snide remarks from her about Obama like some of her endorsers made during Bill's Minneapolis visit.
I understand what you were trying to do Doc Wendel and I think its' good, I only had a problem with the way you did it. Most of the bad blood does not seem to come from the two candidates but from their supporters which is unfortunate but then again politics is ugly.
Again Jesse I think that building consensus is good but we cannot do it by casting aspersions on people. I wish you and the groupnewsblog well as well as both the candidates even though they don't share enough of my values I will be voting for the democratic nominee whoever they are.
I've almost gotten to the point that I can't visit any of the blogs anymore, because the childish in-fighting is making me sick. It doesn't seem to matter what the subject of the entry is - a discussion about the tornadoes last night almost immediately dissolves into "If _____ wins, me and my fellow ______ supporters will vote for McCain or stay home. I will NEVER vote for _____." Dear God, have you been living in another COUNTRY for the last 7 years? Anyone who has and can say that we would be better off with an (R) than Hillbama or Obilliary ISN'T INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO FEED THEMSELVES. I just HATE to quote Matthews, but I have heard him say many times that "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line" and he's right (stopped clock and all). I am so ashamed of my fellow Dems I could retch. And anyone who thinks that Steve G would rubberstamp this as a good thing didn't read the same News Blog that I did - that was one pragmatic S.O.B., and WAY too smart to fall into this bullsh*t.
Stop this nonsense. Remember. ANY (D) is better than EVERY (R). Stop f*cking whining and work to start trying to stop the slide this country is on. Do you think McCain will do that? Really? It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face, and it's an act of complete immaturity. And if you think the GOP isn't gonna foment and push this along to cause dissarray, well, again, what country have you been living in?
And he didn't say that Clinton had more momentum than Obama. He said Clinton has already had all of her dirty garbage paraded on the front pages for the last umpteen years, and Obama has not. YET. Nothing in that statement suggests bias, just a reasoned argument - something I am seeing damned little of these days on the blogs. Obama better hope he is as squeaky clean as a new born baby, because if he is, he will only be TRASHED by the GOP. They don't actually NEED facts to do this, dontcha know...but if they HAVE facts, well, Katie bar the door. If you think what Bill Clinton did was racist, well, kiddies, you better hide your eyes and plug your ears, cause you ain't seen NOTHIN' yet.
Baltogeek, Hillary did come to Minneapolis, From my perspective her problem is that her people were not well organized so they did not have a very well organized campaign. Obama's GOTV effort seemed much larger and deeper
Thanks for the correction tenacitus. I forgot that. But I still think saying "Hey forget those small states look I won California, New York and New Jersey!" is not helpful and somewhat forgets that we need a 50 state strategy to win.
I know that it's all post-election spin but I seem to remember the GOP doing just fine in elections without winning California and other large states.
The Clinton campaign has sold their donor list to a direct marketing outfit.
Mark Halperin suggests they are now self funding.
2/9-10
Caucuses: Maine, Nebraska, Washington. Primaries: Louisiana, Virgin Islands.
Best Clinton case is a wash.
2/12
DC, Virgina, Maryland
No media buys have been made.
2/19
Hawaii(caucus), Wisconsin
Won't stop the bleeding.
3/4 Texas(part primary & caucus) Ohio
All in. Do or die.
Punkster: so you would happly vote forliberman as president?
baltogeek the clinton camp is the DLC camp. they never wanted the 50 state stratagy adn would happly abandone it.
You have to hand it to the Democratic Party establishment. Here they are faced with defeating a broken old man who gleefully talks about bombing Iran, and staying in Iraq for 100 years. And look who they're trying to coronate: a triangulator who doesn't have the character to even apologize her part getting us involved in this quaqmire om the first place and then votes for Kyl-Lieberman. Way to water down the major differentiating factor between the Dems and the GOP!
As for the Hispanic vote, the Dems blew that chance back during the immigration protests a few years ago. There, they had 2 wings of the GOP (religious racists vs guest worker greedheads) at each others' throats, and large, organized crowds marching in the street who are hungry for a third approach. And what did the Dems do? With one exception (Kennedy) they kept quiet. Way to stop Arizona and the rest of the Southwest from turning into a real contest!
Those useless, frightened non-positions represent Hillary's political approach and I will take that into account if she's the nominee. Obviously I'm not going to vote for McCain or Paul (and have yet to see a liberal or progressive who plans to make that straw man a reality). Nor will I waste my time with Nader or the fringe left parties in our 2 party general election. But if Hillary is the nominee, it's also very unlikely I'll be voting Dem (unless, of course, they turn what should be a wide margin of victory into a squeaker yet again). I'm tired of rewarding incompetence and betrayal of core values with my money, my time, and my vote.
Obama is far from perfect, but at least his rhetoric is calling for a change in the Party's over all approach (from the DLC's whine of "maybe we shouldn't" to Obama's "Yes we can!"). Whether he can deliver and get past his "hands across the aisle" foolishness is another matter (I'm hoping a VP like Edwards would help there). But since it's a choice between the him and Hillary, the choice is clear.
I'm with Punkster. The best reasoned post here so far. Except mine.
Quit the CT nonsense that Super delegates will haul her over the finish line. She has 200 and Obama 100 of 800.
Be nice to HRC for the good of the party. Because it's all one big love fest at the big boy & girl level.
Snort.
A good sixty percent of those SD's remaining would walk barefoot over broken glass to stick a dagger in her for slights real or imagined. The rest will go along to get along. Her hard core support has already declared.
If it gets to Denver undecided she will NOT be the nominee.
GoreObama is the best bet to try and gloss over the split.
So Jesse, my main man, I know what *I* will be doing at 1 PM Saturday. I'll be convening 19 precincts here in the WA Democratic caucuses.
*Your* precinct, KEN 33-0588, meets at Kent Elementary School and as yet has no one to convene it. Are you game?
Step up, my brother! Say yes!
Well they say that no fight is like a family feud. And this one is quite the dustup.
I caucused for Obama in South Minneapolis in a room filled with some 300 people... of which maybe 3 were African-americans. We went overwhelmingly for Obama. the difference in the room seemed to be a passion for Obama and an acceptance for Clinton. We shall see how it shakes out.
So far no fat ladies have been singing, so there is much work ahead for either candidate and their supporters. My suggestion is that everybody keep fighting for your beliefs, just remember that the nose you just punched is going to be needed next November so don't say anything you might regret. Keep it fair it is family after all.
blksista, quoting MoDo? WTF? don't think for a minute that MoDo won't be sticking the very same knife into Obama if he wins the nomination
it is a basic fact: the korporate media WILL attack the Democratic nominee
my two biggest worries about Obama is that his "act" will grow old quick and that the worst ReThug opposition he has ever faced was Alan Keyes!
and btw, I will be voting for the Democratic nominee come November
via Andrew Sullivan (the semi-sane conservative): "There is no doubt ... we hope and pray every night to run against Hillary Clinton," - Ari Fleischer, on CNN last night.
if you think Ari is telling the truth then I've got some ocean front property in Kansas to sell to you
Hi!
Hillary is unelectable.
Bye!
Oh and:
"Finally, Obama does not have the Latino or Asian vote. Or the female vote. Not to say many women aren't voting for him. But many more women are voting for Clinton. And overwhelmingly, Asians and Latinos are voting for Clinton."
Tribal politics anyone? Although I agree with the truthiness of this statement (white women vote for the white woman, blacks for the black, latinos hate blacks hence they vote for a white woman), this does not make the Yoo Ess of Ey look good...
GRT: "If the President of the U.S. is a Mormon, that suddenly gives the LDS church an air of legitimacy it has never possessed. This is a recruiting tool of unimaginable potency on a global scale. Even Romney as the GOP nominee provides leverage. There's no way the Evangelical Christians will give them that sort of recruiting tool."
That is a very very VERY interesting point of view there!
americangoy: its an unfortuantiyl acurate poitn of view...there is a reason that Romny and huck despise each other and part of it is that romny (as a mormon) thinks they are on teh same side (religious conservates, the mormons seem to think there are enough converts to share RIGHT NOW..that will change) while huck is joles army style domininist and see the mormons as one of the top enamies (it gose nonchristians, then catholics/mormons as a tie for close second)
Moonglum, Lieberman is not a Democrat, and at the current time, 3rd party candidates are pretty much unelectable (though I suppose that someone with Bloomburg's money behind them might make a credible go at it - but I don't think he could succeed, even if he bled his coffers dry). But then, that wasn't a reasoned question, now was it?
Happily the Democrats don't have their heads *quite* far enough up their asses to nominate Lieberman (anymore) - I think they FINALLY realize what he actually is - so I don't have to make that choice, and neither does anyone else. Neither Clinton nor Obama are a Lieberman, and implying that either of them are is hyperbole worthy of the GOP.
The passion is great, and the Democratic turnouts are massive and a wonderful sign - this is a PRIMARY for God's sake and people are standing in line to vote? You really think they are doing that on the GOP side of the room? But I just say, don't let the passion get so far ahead of you that you (a) burn all kinds of bridges behind you and (b)supply the other side with all of the ammunition required to drive the wedge, split the party, and do the unthinkable - keep this country under GOP rule.
"[I]t is very possible to play full contact politics without the threat of going home if your team loses. The stakes in the fall are far too high for that."
That from a Rightwing talkshow host... just something to think about.
Some random thoughts on blksista's post....
Bet you they get Richardson as Veep in more pandering to the Latino vote.
That sounds very likely, though I'd prefer Obama, myself. Richardson didn't present himself nearly as well ("presidential") as I'd hoped/expected during his campaign.
Regarding MoDo, never forget, as my buddy BartCop sez, she hates everybody--and the Clintons in particular. She just hasn't gotten around to Obama.
Yet.
This description ("...The tall senator often leans down to put a friendly hand on the shoulder of his fellow senators....") sure sounds to me like it could be reasonably interpreted by its recipient as "not so fast trying to get out of your place". I'd say the same if a white had done it to Barack.
I expect both Hillary and Obama to need "extra" votes to overcome the "Racists/Sexists-won't-admit-to-pollsters-to-
voting-against-The-Other" Effect. Not that that's a reason we should have kept Edwards in the race. And not that that's an expectation that either will lose or neither can win. I'll simply quote myself that we'll only know after the fact that America has gotten to a place where a white woman or a black man can be elected president.
Excerpt:
"A few weeks ago, I was doing work for the U.S. military in Florida, and happened to visit an independent bookstore. By the cash register was a display of Hillary Clinton Nutcracker dolls for sale, and bags of walnuts. After purchasing one, a real man could sit at home cracking walnuts between an unflattering Hillary doll's thighs, and have a few laughs with his pals. I asked one of the store managers if they would sell an Obama doll done up like a shuck n'jive minstrel or an Amos and Andy look alike. Of course not, I was told, that would be racist.
"It has become increasing clear in this presidential campaign that it is harder to run as a woman than as an African American male."
I quote this not to whine that America is still too sexist (and racist, which it is), but as an honest recognition that I don't think either is guaranteed a win. And if I was told only one could win, I don't know which one it would be.
I remain struck by the quote attributed to Shirley Chisholm that she faced more discrimination as a woman than as a black.
Let's be careful about playing into the Right's "Dems fighting among themselves" gameplan.
Well, that's (probably more than) enough for now....
P.S. I'm voting/working for the Democrat in November. Even if it's Obama.
"It has become increasing clear in this presidential campaign that it is harder to run as a woman than as an African American male."
Oh Good CHRIST!!!
bartcopfan then explain this (h/t rikyrah):
There are, what, 9 White Female Governors?
1 Black male Governor.
NEVER a Black Female Governor.
There are what, 15 White Female Senators.
1 Black Male Senator.
Only 1 Black Female Senator.
You know why we get to see so many mainly white women face misogyny as political candidates because many black men don't even get far enough to run.
You know with almost a third of them being incarcerated and the horrendous education and lack of opportunity and all.
As a black woman it absolutely amazes me that people can honestly believe something like this.
Jesus Christ.
Amuseinc for teh democrats to win they will need mroe votes then jsut teh democrats. I am not tellign partisans not to vote for hillary come november if she is your canadate. what I am sayign is that if the dmeocrats make that bed they better be prepared to live with teh results.
rigth niow here are the dynamics, you have a republican side that will only get their base to vote, and it will eb a denergized base. its teh democrats election to lsoe at this point.
on the dmeocrat side you have two opttions. canadate 1 will energize nondemocrate votors adn get teh base + indipendnets + moderates + some disenchanted republicnas to vote for them. canadate 2 deenergizes the base, and will only get the base to vote for them..more over due to years of retoric they will reenergize the republican base. oh and due to years of tirangulation by canadate 2's advisors the democrat base is smaller then teh republican base.
so there is your scenario. You have to face it, the republicnas win unless the dmeocrats reach out for help...they had that chance in 2k4 and chose the establisment over the canadates that could bring in that help. Will they make that mistake again? Hell worst case scnerio this gose down to the convention and back room dealing sends teh nomination to canadate 2. that gives the republicnas there generational majority and sinks the dems for the forseeable future.
there was hope for an alternative out come. if huck was nominated by the republicnas a lot of the nonfundies would sit on there hands to keep the crazy out of office. if Romny the na lot of fundies would sit to keep the haritic out. with Mccain as the compromise cnadate you have a lot of troubls on the dem side of the line if we send the same old canadate up to lose.
Amuesinc, which precint are you in? I ended up becoming a teller & delegate for my precinct, my wife is pissed that I did not vote for Hillary, I understand what Mr. Field felt last night , I was very glad to be in my first caucus. Being in the caucus confirmed my view that the best thing for the individual to do is get involved in their neighborhood political process, that is where we can really have an impact.
I agree with punkster and Gay Veteran. When did it happen that people couldn't come here and speak their minds? I can't tell you how disheartened I was at the first comment re: Jesse. No wonder Jesse got pissed. And I quite agree, quoting MoDo, are you for real? That bitch will be all over Obama first chance she gets slinging lye. I wonder if he'll be able to take it. We sure know Hillary can.
I love bartcopfan's anecdote and yes, it is easier for an AA male to run than it is for a woman. And all of you Obama supporters should be leery about that and not so quick to think that he'll beat McCain. All of the white male support on Super Tuesday smacks a lot of mysoginist mischief making and downright Hillary/Clinton hatred. In Nov, should Obama get the nod, they'll vote for the guy that most resembles them. No way am I convinced that the Bradley effect won't be in play. Ask yourself this question: How many black Senators are there? That's right, you can count them on one finger and he's running for president. Just ask Harold Ford about how easy it is to get elected.
My deepest fear is that the Dems are playing into the Repugs hands. They've convinced a lot of old Hillary haters and a lot of new ones, too, that she's unelectable, when in reality, it's the Clintons that they fear most because they've proven they can win. I watched Bill Bennett squirm as he admitted that you just can't count these people out. He said this while also gushing over Obama. Bill Bennett gushing over Obama....
Be afraid.... be very afraid.
I can say this as a proud Hillary supporter. I will vote for Obama should he win the nomination. And I'll do so enthusiastically. Looks like a lot of Obama supporters who claim to so violently despise the ratfuck Republicans, won't do the same. I guess their feelings are MORE important than the election. And you wonder why we don't win the Presidency more often. The idea of 4 more years of Republican rule is starting to really make me ill.
And Jesse.... stay strong.
JJ --
You misread me.
I said Obama has the momentum.
Go read the last paragraph of the post. *smiles*
But this is what I'm talking about where I mean it's getting tough. I'm assumed to be in the tank, and I'm not. I'm making what I consider grounded assessments. You misread a line, and instantly assume I said something against your guy. You're reading me through a filter.
Please... start from the assumption I could be voting for Obama or voting for Clinton, that I genuinely haven't decided and probably won't till I'm right there in the room. Or perhaps at either the Obama or (if she comes to Washington) the Clinton speech.
Either way, I'm open to either candidate. But attacking me or attacking the other candidate, or attacking GNB readers who are for (in this case, Clinton) will just turn me off Obama. It's taking most everything I've got to keep coming back to the table and work to stay open to the guy. I do that because he's an exciting, dynamic speaker, who has some interesting things to say, and I believe leadership -- genuine leadership, leadership which inspires people to pick up and take action, is one of the key parts of being President. We need a president who will inspire a nation and bring us back together again.
On the other hand, I don't like Obama's health care plan at all; Clinton's is clearly better in my view. So also says Paul Krugman.
The one thin I wonder about Obama is why he hasn't made more the fact that he marched with the Immigration peole in the Spring (the only Senator other than Kennedy to to so) you think this would have been a big selling point for him with the Latino Communtiy.
Jesse:
Hang in there, guy. It never fails to amaze me how quickly an attempt to realistically assess the odds gets transmogrified into covert support for a candidate. People need to take a chill pill, especially since it looks as though this thing is going to drag on for a while yet.
And yeah, my experience makes me agree that Clinton's organizational moxie may give her a slight edge -- in the primaries, anyway. Whether that translates into an advantage in the general is the real question.
Disclosure: I pulled the lever for Obama yesterday. I'd have voted for Edwards, if he'd still been in the race.
Do I loves me some Obama? Obviously not, and frankly, the quasi-religious fervor of some of his supporters is a big turnoff. Do I hate Clinton? No. My reservations about each nominee differ, but neither set of qualms was particularly definitive when it came time to vote.
Part of the reason I decided for Obama was that I wanted to send the DLC and Clinton's corporate backers a message: The peasants are getting restless.
Whoever gets the nomination, I'll vote for them, even if it does require major suppression of my gag reflex.
Tenicitus, Senate district 61, Precinct 8-6... First Kingsfield Volunteers. That is if a bunch of pasty white urban ultra-liberals with a penchant for strong coffee and Obama can sound like a Civil War group.
Silly bunnies, vote for the Democrat. That's all there is to it.
Hillary and Obama are both very electable. Democrats are outpolling the hell out of the GOP this year, and the Republicans have to run with eight years of Bush baggage.
If you want more Republican crap working on destroying the country, vote for a Republican. If you want to do something, anything, to save the country, vote for an imperfect Democrat.
Wait a minute.
Gay Vet sez:
blksista, quoting MoDo? WTF? don't think for a minute that MoDo won't be sticking the very same knife into Obama if he wins the nomination
Excuse me, but a stopped clock is right at least once or twice in a 24-hour day. I dislike Miss Spike Heels almost as much as Tweety (Jeezus, will someone please remove his ass and quickly and put Rachel or K.O. in his place? Even Brokaw cannot abide him now), but news of how the Borg Queen actually behaves towards equals as well as underlings really confirmed for me the worst scenario for our country if this woman is voted into office with her overcompensating husband.
my two biggest worries about Obama is that his "act" will grow old quick and that the worst ReThug opposition he has ever faced was Alan Keyes!
Agreed; the kumbaya moments have got to stop and the heavy, but nuanced hitting has got to begin.
and btw, I will be voting for the Democratic nominee come November
You know what? I really haven't decided that far in advance yet. I just want Obama to win. Period. Yes, he is the anti-Hillary. In fact, he's the last one we have available with national stature.
The thing people really have to worry about is not Nader coming in to make things interesting, but deep-pockets indie Bloomberg who could come in at any moment.
Bartcopfan chimed in about my visualizing Richardson as the bait for the Latino vote:
That sounds very likely, though I'd prefer Obama, myself. Richardson didn't present himself nearly as well ("presidential") as I'd hoped/expected during his campaign.
This is a co-presidency that is being touted, although Ms. Pantsuit claims she's going to handle power-mad Bill. Don't you believe it. Richardson would only have to be there as prop and as prop only, like with FDR's tobacco-spitting John Nance Garner. I know how this is going sit with the immigrant haters, though. They will flip.
This description ("...The tall senator often leans down to put a friendly hand on the shoulder of his fellow senators....") sure sounds to me like it could be reasonably interpreted by its recipient as "not so fast trying to get out of your place." I'd say the same if a white had done it to Barack.
You mean Hillary interpreted Obama's gesture as not being gentle; and she was basically telling him to fuck off being gentle, trying to calm her down, or whatever? You know, I've known some white people in my life that have pulled exactly the same kind of BS as Hillary. That I am getting out of line while s/he is pitching a bitch in public wanting to show how much more superior they are? Excuse me for living. MoDo's outline seems so much more realistic to me. Why? Because it certainly is fucking racist behavior, in my opinion, on top of being proof positive that Hillary is out of her fucking mind.
Lastly:
I remain struck by the quote attributed to Shirley Chisholm that she faced more discrimination as a woman than as a black.
Let me tell you something. Whenever I come into view in some areas of this very white city in this very white state, it's the color they see first and the gender second. The color is almost always more frightening and a reason for defensiveness bordering on irrationality.
The second thing that Shirley knew and I know for sure is that sexism and homophobia is still present within the black community. The statement she made was in context of how she was continually and progressively sabotaged and ridiculed by black male leadership (yes, and even Jesse) when she ran for president in 1972. It was not necessarily how she was viewed by the larger American society or even by white feminists.
Off soapbox.
I think we should have a discussion here about what a terrible candidate John McCain is for the Republicans. He is their sacrificial lamb this cycle and is unlikely to get some of the institutional support that Republicans NEED to win.
There are going to be two things that are going to be true come November. The economy will be reeling and Iraq will be a mess. McCain punts on the economy and says that we should stay 100 years in Iraq. This is the "maverick" that will win the nomination? He doesn't even hold together one of the 3 principle group clusters the Republicans have formed. He gets the defense spending imperial conservatives BUT a subset of them is wary of him for not endorsing torture. He doesn't have even a credible pander to the Jesus-loving, people-hating faction, and like I said before he has no economic ideas for the Wall Street crowd other than to end pork-barrel spending- a good notion but in actuality a small part of the budget and an even smaller part of the national economy.
McCain got front-runner status by a number of breaks and outright flukes. Believe me if Romney wasn't a Mormon and instead some vanilla brand of Protestant Christian he would be the nominee. But Huckabee knocked out Romney in Iowa. McCain appealed to a favorable Republican + independents crowd in New Hampshire. A Thompson-Huckabee-Romney split allowed him to come in first in South Carolina and the momentum from that carried him in Florida.
Senators Clinton or Obama can beat him in a general election. Republicans need EVERYONE that they have to come out for them in election time to win and there are people in the Republican base that will stay home. The economy will sink him among the independent moderates and Iraq will bash him on the head as he slips under.
Le sigh. Reading this thread makes my head hurt.
I voted for Obama--and had my white work pants ruined by two very cute Obama-doggies (pugs in matching Obama sweaters) that jumped all over me when their owner was putting a sticker on my messenger bag. They literally CLIMED UP ME. As in one jump, front paws on Jen's knee (one on each leg) and jump #2 got their back legs on each knee and front paws on the middle of each thigh. Now I have to do a drip-dry laundry on Friday, for that and the puppy-slobbers on my wheat/gold sweater. But I digress.
As noted earlier, I will pull the lever for the Dem candidate, be it Billary or Obama.
More later, back to work... (Jen tries to relax by thinking about cute Obama pug puppies in matching sweaters even though they left paw prints all over her white pants, before a dinner meeting)
prof fate: "Do I loves me some Obama? Obviously not, and frankly, the quasi-religious fervor of some of his supporters is a big turnoff. Do I hate Clinton? No. My reservations about each nominee differ, but neither set of qualms was particularly definitive when it came time to vote."
AMEN
blksista: "You know what? I really haven't decided [voting for the Democratic nominee if it's Hillary come November] that far in advance yet."
interesting, I'm a Gay white male and I will vote for "Obama the Second Coming of Jebus" even though he threw Gays under the bus in South Carolina. Why? because some things (our fucking country) are more important than other things (like our favorite candidate getting the nomination)
blksista --
Bloomberg isn't coming in. Don't sweat it.
Jen --
It's more peaceful than it was yesterday. People are saying they're for this candidate and for that candidate, and no one is knocking them for what they're saying. That's progress. I'm proud of people for this.
Sorry about your pants.
Have you seen this video and message from Lawrence Lessig on Obama
">Video and Letter
@Jesse...
I didn't misread ur post. I actually read quite clearly...u did say Obama's momentum peaked about two weeks too late and he had no where to go but down and Clinton had no where (u might not have said no where) to go but up?
That is right right?
I didn't attack you. Just your post which I thought was off. And based on much of your posting I'd be very surprised if you voted for Obama.
I don't think your analysis holds up well with what happened last night and the current landscape for Febuary.
Dailykos and Americablog (neither which I'm much of a fan of) have a better take on the situation. Which is:
Hillary needs to survive February and she stands to do well on March 4th which then make Pennsylvania in April a BIG DEAL.
Hillary isn't out of this thing by a long shot. But she took a BIG hit last night and at best the odds are 50/50 with a slight edge toward Obama (his money and her lack of is a big factor) as far as pledged delegates go.
Will that hold up? Who knows. Anything is possible. but 60/40? Obama's momentum cresting..no.
Referring to Hillary Clinton disparagingly as "Ms. Pantsuit" is sexist. You lost me right there. It's no more funny than referring to Barack Obama as "Mistah Shinysuit" would be.
I wish we could just discuss the issues without resorting to stereotypes. Thanks for pushing us to try, Jesse.
Both Hillary and Barack are being attacked for their gender and race. The form of the attacks are different (the woman-hating is right out in the open) and what I'm encountering, as a woman, on leftie blogs is far more misogyny disguised as "I just hate her because she's part of the establishment who also happens to be a beyotch". I'm noting names and keeping track: Refusing to have dealt with your discomfort at supporting an (imperfect) woman at this stage of feminism means your credibility is shot, as far as I'm concerned. To exactly the same degree as a winger who claims he can't support Barack because he's not experienced enough but codes it in language that implies blacks are inferior.
At one interval this past year I echoed Molly Ivins in stating I would not vote for Hillary Clinton. It seemed a point to make at the time. Now I'm clear I will of course vote for her if she's the Democratic candidate, and however I feel about her (or whoever the nominee is) is secondary to my concern for my country. Any other position is grandstanding at best, irresponsible at worst.
Comparing woman-hating and white supremacy (sexism and racism) is not useful. They are institutionalized in different ways (one tends to inhabit our bedrooms more), and they must be contradicted in different ways. Barack is not confronting C*NT T-shirts but the risk of assassination for him is intense -- they are out to get him, and since they cannot use the commodity of woman-hating that works so well against Hillary (even within so-called progressive circles), they'll use another form of violence. I literally pray for them both, and am grateful beyond words for the leadership both have displayed as best they can.
JJ --
Seriously, you should go back and actually READ what I said, not interpret it.
Quoting:
I think the odds are 60/40 Clinton pulls it off. But as Hubris Sonic says, the momentum is with Obama. For sure, I say, if he'd had an extra two weeks, he'd make it. I think he's behind the curve and Clinton is too deeply entrenched.
Further, Obama's positives are as high right now as they ever will be. He's riding a media wave. No one is attacking him in any serious way and he has nowhere to go but down. Clinton has her unfavorable's sky high and has nowhere to go but up, because she's Hillary Clinton and the right-wing hates her more than they hate Black people and Jews.
But Hubris could be right. It could go Obama's way.
....
Enough. Flux. Momentum for Obama. Organization and rules/delegate count for Clinton.
End of quotes.
What I said was, Obama has the momentum. I said that, and I said that Hubris Sonic said that. In fact, I said twice that [in my assessment] Obama has the momentum. I also pointed to Hubris's opinion twice.
Where you are confusing your interpretation of what I said with what I did say, is where I talk about Obama and Clinton's over/under, their positive/negative ratings.
I said that Obama is at the peak of his media popularity, is not being seriously attacked, and can only go down. I said that Clinton's over/under is in the crapper but it's all out there on the table. After this long, everyone has an opinion one way or another; it isn't as if she hasn't been vetted. So her negatives will in my view, go up as her advertising kicks in to gear closer to the election.
On the other hand, Obama's positives will go down as the media stops making him the new kid on the block and starts looking for things to rip him a new one for. He's never been exposed to the full sound and fury of the national press core or the Republican Party all out to destroy him. That's coming. And it doesn't have to have a damn thing to do with the truth. It can be all lies. The whole Muslim hate school thing is a lie. So what? Repeat it enough and it will sway voters. Hell, it was being published out here in Washington State on the official GOP Website of two counties. No kidding. Even after they were told it was a lie.
And that's just for a primary. Wait till he wins the damn nomination; all bets will be off.
My point is, the two statements aren't related, but you made them related.
1. Obama has momentum, said twice by me, and pointed to by me twice that HS said it.
I also said that I don't think it's going to be enough; that he needed to have had the momentum two weeks earlier. Again, that doesn't take away from my assessment that he has momentum.
2. Clinton's over/under will climb, and Obama's over/under will fall. I simply don't see any other way this can play out. Am I wrong? We shall see.
Jesse it looks like obama has pulled ahead in delegate count (not looking at the super delegates)...seems hillary is loaning herself money. I would say that the momentum seems ot be catching up to her.
This is all reminding me how much I hate the horse race. We elect these people to DO something and right now the Constitution is being gobbled up and spit out in pieces by a bipartisan majority.
We'd be better off with no President.
just like to say that there is a polling chart for the Democratic contenders at www.pollster.com, showing a huge spike in Obama's numbers. They show an upturn for Hillary as well, but the momentum right now is based more on a song tribute.
And a word to the wise: talk of banning people smacks of censorship -- I know that no-one at the group news blog is in favor of that 
wengler: "We'd be better off with no President."
let McCain win (Bush's THIRD term) and we'll be without a Republic
baltogeek -- there are more women in those jobs you mentioned because there are far more women then there are blacks.
Women have been oppressed for far longer than any other group.
Here is a great (and short) article by Brad Hicks on votes counting. Read it:
http://bradhicks.livejournal.com...com/
376637.html
clinton is out of money, her staff is working for free now and she is abandonign all of the contests except for texas and ohio and pensilvania (looks liek she is relying on surrogets and a big initiila lead in PA not actualy goign to champaing)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23037431/
shes tapped out, all of her large doners have contributed the max, obama is getting ALL of the samll donor money and more large donors will be lookign at him as they need to hedge their bets
care to reasses those odds?
One point that might bear repeating: the Democratic nomination process was clearly not designed for this kind of race.
Since the primary era began in 1976, the Democratic process has become optimized to sort through a large number of candidates reasonably quickly, and to launch one -- usually the best-financed candidate, usually the one who has attracted the broadest range of support throughout the party -- ahead of the pack toward the nomination.
(Even with the extreme time compression of this year's gauntlet of primaries and caucuses, the basic process of delegate allocation hasn't fundamentally changed.)
But this time around, the pack melted away too quickly, and there are *two* roughly equal candidates left standing.
And with only two candidates, the extreme proportionalism of the delegate allocation process means that it will be extremely difficult for either candidate to open up an appreciable margin (say, several hundred) on the other.
It's mildly bizarre that actually *winning* elections has now become relatively unimportant; consider the to-ing and fro-ing over who won Missouri -- the fact of Obama's win there might have shifted at most *one* delegate into his column. And on the other hand, Clinton's ten-point California win seems to have had a similarly minor effect upon that state's delegate allocation.
So even if Obama takes advantage of the friendly upcoming schedule for the rest of this month, he won't be able to accumulate the sort of delegate advantage that would propel him into inevitability. And if Clinton were able to pull out a couple of victories over the next month (Virginia? Wisconsin?), she'd be faced with exactly the same problem.
So unless something really, really unexpected happens, it seems safest to assume that both Clinton and Obama will be in this race all the way to the convention.
Gay Vet sez:
interesting, I'm a Gay white male and I will vote for "Obama the Second Coming of Jebus" even though he threw Gays under the bus in South Carolina. Why? because some things (our fucking country) are more important than other things (like our favorite candidate getting the nomination)
Number one, I wasn't for Obama until just recently. Edwards was my man. I can well understand the exuberance some people may have for Obama, but after reading Black Agenda Report and The Black Commmentator as well as Pam's House Blend for the past few months, I am not that dazzled by him.
Two, I never thought of Obama as the second coming of anybody. I see Obama as a conservative Democrat who will use both liberal and conservative means to win and to hold office. What has killed any respect I had remaining for Hillary is her dogging Obama personally (which has also ticked off many blacks of both conservative and liberal persuasion), and her creeping, grasping megalomania.
Three, I hated that he added Donnie McClurkin in that tour he made months ago to meet black voters. It was not only unnecessary, it was pandering and homophobic.
I'd rather work to see that I still have a choice rather than resign myself to vote for Billary supposedly "when the time comes."
Next,
Referring to Hillary Clinton disparagingly as "Ms. Pantsuit" is sexist. You lost me right there. It's no more funny than referring to Barack Obama as "Mistah Shinysuit" would be.
Keep your vaunted indignation to yourself.
Hillary referred to herself as wearing the pantsuit in the White House a few days ago in answer to a question on Letterman about her overcompensating husband. So I don't think that I, The Huffington Post, and other media outlets are out of line to quote her, even out of context.
I kind of feel sorry for Clinton for having to loan herself that money. I know she got money for her book, but she doesn't have Mitt Romney money.
On the other hand, she did take all that dirty lobbyist money. Obama I am guessing has the all time lead in small donor individual donations. I wish he would have stuck only to small donor individual donations but he did make the small distinction of not accepting lobbyist money or I believe PAC money for whatever that is worth.
Kim C, the context of the conversation was about the claim that women have more obstacles to face politically than black men not about who has suffered 'more'.
It's plainly ignorant to assert that black men have a slew of political advantages just because they have a dick. Empirically it's absurd.
I guess it's another unfair advantage that Obama has to have more security around because of all the racist fools out there. Those assassination worries do make him seem more presidential.
"Seriously can we stop this Latinos hate blacks crap."
Didn't they HATE blacks. Just won't vote black.
Just like southern christians won't vote mormon.
Just like hippies won't vote republican.
Just like a "republican" won't vote "democrat".
Just like a "democrat" won't vote "republican".
et cetera et cetera et cetera....
That's what it's ALL about.
Your handlers know this.
It's American Idol now, not American President.
Enjoy the puppet show.
correcton: didn't SAY they hate blacks.
"It has become increasing clear in this presidential campaign that it is harder to run as a woman than as an African American male."
Oh Good CHRIST!!!
blksista, please don't overread what I wrote or quoted. (Except maybe my bolded sentence.)
What I quoted said "harder" to run; my wild-assed guess would be, like, a 55-45 comparison. Not 90-10 or 100-0.
How many stories has Barack had on his hair? His wardrobe? The status of his family and marriage? Since 1990?
You know why we get to see so many mainly white women face misogyny as political candidates because many black men don't even get far enough to run.
You know with almost a third of them being incarcerated and the horrendous education and lack of opportunity and all.
I can't argue with either of those points.
As a black woman it absolutely amazes me that people can honestly believe something like this.
Again, please don't assume too much about what I believe. I'm not saying Barack's got it easy. I agree that he's got a damned hard road ahead. I'm just saying they both do and I think spending our time arguing over who has suffered more, while necessary and useful, is counterproductive to our mutually-agreed task of getting the Republican'ts out of the White House. Either way we do it is going to make history. Or herstory.
I don't need to tell you black men have been lynched for looking at a white woman wrong (e.g, at all). And who were kept down because of it? Both blacks and women.
Thanks for your comments. I come here to hear what others think, especially people I'm not like, to see where we agree and disagree.
I'll stand by my earlier statement: Let's be careful about playing into the Right's "Dems fighting among themselves" gameplan.
Hell, I keep forgetting to post what I started out to do....
Thanks, JW for the great map! I think y'all have posted it before, but I'd forgotten about it. It reminds me that that was one of the things that really made me identify with Gilly: a shared appreciation of maps.
We all look, sound, and write alike do we?
Bartcofan:
blksista, please don't overread what I wrote or quoted. (Except maybe my bolded sentence.)
I didn't respond to you. Baltogeek did. Everything you are responding to, Baltogeek wrote.
I am blksista.
Over and out.
I did write that response up thread to Bartcopfan. I was so worked, I forgot to ID myself.
Second,
baltogeek -- there are more women in those jobs you mentioned because there are far more women then there are blacks.
Women have been oppressed for far longer than any other group.
Now this is really interesting.
Aren't some of those women black?
Another question. Aren't many white women still getting plum jobs (through affirmative action) while black and Latino women are left to deal with their own version of the glass ceiling?
Some even train those white women who go into middle and senior management.
Please, don't bother. I hear and see enough everyday as it is.
I have not made up my mind either, but there is one important issue that has not been touched. Which candidate is likely to have the longest coattails ?
Alot more of a progressive agenda will be possible with a senate that has say 60 democratic senators then one with 55. Regardless of what either candidate says, having just more dems in the congress may make any president be bold. On this score Obama has the edge since he seems to be attracting more voters then Clinton. On the other hand, Clinton has already been through the fire with the reich wing. Remember folks, one is not just voting for a president, but voting for a ticket.
blksista: it was my wifes experience that the 40+ year old white women where doign there damdist to make sure that otehr women where held back. they seem to eb impalmentign a new glass celing...hell one female manager fired my wife for beign pregnante then told her team (she was a lead devloper at teh time) that she chose to quite to be a full time mom.
Just form what I have seen in the corperate world old women seem to discriminate the most agenst teh young women.
Well, shit.
Yes, blksista, you're exactly right, I was responding to baltogeek. Your posts made a strong impression on me (particularly about MoDo and her, your, and my interpretations of the Hillary/Obama confrontation) and I failed keep track of who wrote what. Please accept my apology for what I consider a serious mistake on my part. And for the TMI to follow.
I hear you suggest these are strongly felt issues, core to our beings and it is easy to get worked up about them. Frankly, I don't see how one could not.
Now, to step in it with both feet, as far as "We all look, sound, and write alike do we?" my honest answer would be "hell no" and I'd try to figure out why I'm apparently an even lousier communicator than I'd imagined, because that is exactly the opposite of what I was trying to convey.
[I actually agonized over writing "especially people I'm not like": I started to say "people not like me", but then (in my pea-brain) that sounded like I'd be saying that I am the standard against which all others are to be compared, which is, again, the exact opposite of what I meant. So I wrote what I wrote, instead, thinking it would work. Obviously, it didn't.]
Sitting on my fat white straight middle-aged married w/ kids male ass in my comfortable former-sundown suburb hometown, my assumption is that there exists no Single Voice for any human experience. I loved coming to Gilly's because I felt like it gave me a better-than-other-blogs-I-read chance to hear A black voice--not The "Black Experience". I tagged along to GNB for some of the same. Besides, I was usually impressed w/ what LowerManhattanite had to say in his comments and figured I'd give him a try when he and the worthy others decided to start this blog, besides feeling it honored Steve to visit what he'd helped inspire.
To me, the only way to know The Human (or whatever black, or Latino/a, or GLBTQI, or fill-in-the-blank sliver one want to talk about...) Experience would be to listen deeply to every human who ever lived. Hell, now that I think about it, even that's not enough--it would have to span over every human's lifetime. (I know my thoughts and feelings about people, places, and events have sometimes changed over time.)
Of course, that's impossible, so I content myself with trying to take in what I can, like sipping from a firehose.
And this is one of the places I like best, because I perceive it to have a good mix of people from different backgrounds, with similar (but not identical) values, and a good mix of subject matter. (I'm even more boring than usual when I'm non-stop politics.) I don't give a shit about soccer/futbol or le Tour de France, but I honestly enjoyed seeing Steve and others write about them with knowledge and passion, if for no other reason than just to see what I could learn that might still have application for me.
Anyway, I'll close (*applause*) by saying that, for me, Sojourner Truth's "Ain't I a Woman?" speech is one of the greatest political orations I'm aware of.
Which candidate is likely to have the longest coattails?
My SWAG is that it's a wash. The white male christianist slime machine will attack either Democrat with the heat of a thousand suns.
bartcopfan: they would attack any democrat with that slim regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, background, ect.
this is where the clinton electability meme they tryed ot folat in SC truly falls falt. sure obamas skin will drive away the neanderthals, so will her gender, and so will that little d after their name.
edwards would get attacked in teh same manner, any d canadate will...and the hard core r voters will allways be hard core r voters don't worry about them.
"they would attack any democrat with that slim regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, background, ect....the hard core r voters will allways be hard core r voters don't worry about them."
I couldn't agree more, moonglum.
bartcopfan --- "GLBTQI"
If you put those letters in alphabetical order-- BGILQT -- you can pronounce it bagel-cutie or beagle-cutie.
ha ha! Nice suggestion, Kim C!
I didn't make up the acronym, I just used what I was handed.
Hmmmm...it could also be rearranged into BGITQL: a "bigot quill" for puncturing others' prejudices (like a porcupine quill) or for communicating our thoughts (like a quill pen).
OK, my brain hurts now....
Commenting by HaloScan
