OMG, we're VOTING FOR HIM. Shut up!

I'm a Hillary supporter. I'm going to vote for your candidate in the general election. I will willingly vote for him although I neither like him nor trust him, because I am a party loyalist and it's not the first and won't be the last time I have to vote for someone I personally find distasteful.

AT THE SAME TIME, (and I know this might be hard for some of you to grasp, but stay with me Jimbo, stay with me), I still find the sexism inherent IN THE MEDIA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcdnlNZg2iM

AND HERE ON DU disgusting and worth talking about in the context of what we will accept as a society. I'm not THREATENING YOU or your candidate by bringing it up. There are like 5 people on this whole damned website who say they won't vote for Obama in the general, and they're pissed off and you're KEEPING IT GOING, but I suspect they'll come around by November if you'll LEAVE THEM THE HELL ALONE for five freaking minutes. And if they don't, well, that's life, isn't it? You continually acting like a jerk is NOT going to convince them - nothing will. Surely it's no skin off your or your candidate's nose if Hillary supporters are NOT in love with Obama, do NOT relish the idea of voting for him, and DO want to discuss the misogyny in which the media and some Obama supporters here on DU have been so comfortable engaging.

So, to sum up:

1. The vast majority of us Hillary supporters are going to vote for your candidate.
2. Those who don't will not be convinced by either your appeasement nor your abuse. Leaving them alone to come to decisions on their own is by far the most effective strategy you could employ.
3. Discussing sexism is a PROGRESSIVE ISSUE that is not an indictment of your candidate. Stop taking shit personally.
4. Leave us alone, we're voting for him. DAMN.

Oh yeah, K&R. :)

Why do you neither like him nor trust him?

:thumbsup:

It isn't politically possible for Obama to address that issue the way you want him to, so he has responded in the best way possible by removing McClurken from any participation in his campaign. what more do you want?

up the black evangelical vote. But as you say, we can't erase history. So I'll just get myself a big clothespin.

And you are right. The people that I and many others find so annoying here aren't going to be convinced by everyone piling on them. But I would add, they don't leave US alone, by continually posting things that we can't help but respond to.

As for that Donnie McClurkin business..well, I'm gay, and that has never bothered me in the least. All candidates make mistakes like this. I can't understand how anyone who has heard Obama speak or examined his policies and record could possibly believe that he will turn on gay people once he is in office. That would be so completely contrary to his entire message and the whole thrust of his public life, that it defies reason.

I appreciate the common sense of your general attitude, and the fact that you will vote for him in November, despite your doubts. I don't think you will be sorry.

about people posting things just to get a rise. See my post here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6043422&mesg_id=6043775

The main reason I won't be sorry is that I'll be voting absentee from France - my husband and I are moving there in September. :D But the whole world will have to deal with the aftermath of this election if McCain wins. So my vote still matters to me.

I adore France. Yes, the Parisians can have an attitude, but the rest of the country is one of the friendliest places I have ever been. And it is the only place that can rival the Pacific Northwest for beauty, IMO. I envy you.

We will be in a beautiful, beautiful area. My husband is a European citizen so we don't have to deal with immigration issues the way we would if we were both American, thank goodness!

The rest of France uses "Parisien" as an insult. True story! :D

I will never forget being in a tiny village in southern France called Fourneaux. The whole town turned out to see the Americans. We spoke little French and they spoke no English, but we had a great time singing songs at each other; lol.

thank you very much.

I hope you will write some more.

If people are voting for him that's good enough for me. I have great confidence that he will earn their respect and trust through his actions as President.

Donnie did his job--he lured in the religious bigots in South Carolina. His work is finished. I mean, it's not like Obama's going to take a tongue-speaking religious loonie to the Getty Mansion, is he?

Long day. :loveya:

darned message board that I seem to be so addicted to, so I understand how you feel.

sometimes you just have to know.

;)

Even if we vote for him in the GE, we won't take ownership if he loses the election.

See The Pottery Barn Rule...

Read: "Condition #1" for her "support" of Obama's nomination.

Doesn't seem like Hillary can take ownership of her own flawed campaign strategies or her piss-poor choice of advisers, or her one-dimensional fund-raising skills, either.

But again, "ownership" doesn't seem to be a real strong point for her camp, as a general rule of thumb.

Who's Jimbo? Do you think all Obamatrons are male? I know I am, but my wife isn't, so I don't know whether to take it personally, or if I'm eavesdropping. Please help me.

MOVIES AREN'T REAL!

:shrug:

but I did it any way. I neither liked nor trusted either of them. I supported Gary Hart.

I didn't want to vote for Dukakis/Bentsen in '88. I started out with Hart and floated to Jesse after teh scandal, though was totally unenthusiastic that year.

I didn't want to vote for Clinton, but I held my nose and did it twice.

Wasn't a big Gore fan, but I did vote for him.

Definitely did not enjoy voting Kerry/Edwards, but I had to.

This will be the first time I'll actually be voting FOR somebody in the presidential race.

but I voted for him.

and will NOT enjoy this year. Them's the breaks. I'm a Dem.

You poor thing...

Jesus, I'd plant a big wet kiss on the envelope (Oregon) if Rodeodance was the only name on it!

Again, as I said above, start with Donnie McClurken.

My one consolation is that I'll be voting absentee. My husband and I are moving to Europe in September. So I won't have to deal with the aftermath of the election no matter how it goes. :)

.

Please consider removing the last two words in the OP title. Your message would be more effective.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6041872

However, I do agree that sexism AND racism are inherent in the media. There are in incredible number of studies that have proved it.

Not possible to use it as an answer to "Will you vote for Obama" in the general, considering you've got another issue in there.

I'm not trying dump on Hillary supporters, the majority will vote for Obama, but I do think there is a problem we should discuss. A large number of DUers are still so angry, they say they will not vote Democratic in November. While I'm sure the majority of that group will eventually hold their noses and pull the Democratic lever, it's still a current issue.

It'd be great if we could find a way to discuss this without insulting each other because it's certainly not good to ignore it.

Even if you believed that your poll is representative (and with a third issue in there, there isn't a statistician on earth who would think it was valid as an up-or-down question), there's STILL only, what? Fewer than 20 people who responded they wouldn't vote for him? This website has tens of thousands of members. But it's still a "problem we should discuss" because it's so damned important that every single one of us fall into lockstep with your candidate? Newsflash: we're not going to. We'll vote for him, but we probably won't ever like him or trust him or have nice things to say about him. You're going to have to live with that.

There's no need to start with the "fall into lockstep" imagery. I won't bother you with my opinion again. :shrug:

it's the more centrist females that were supporting Hillary because she was a woman. The vast majority of DUers will vote Obama, more won't vote than will vote for McCain, but the DU is relatively small. A great place for finding like-minded liberals, but not a significant voting block. Females who are not politically savvy could easily be swayed from one side to another because of ignorance and public perception, and that is the true threat for this November.

Side-note: I'm not intending any disrespect, but almost every post from a female talking about who they will vote for talks about the gender as a whole, saying "we will do this" or "we will not do this," etc. It's interesting, because as a male, I tackle problems like that on an individual basis (I will/won't do this.") Is that a female condition or over analyzation on my part? I understand that the question was posed in terms of, "what will your gender do," and that form of a question is indusive for a first-person plural response, but there have been other posts, and it's just something that I've noticed.
This is actually kind of important- talking to your gender isn't difficult for me, but in terms of choosing the most effective words, this caries weight. Also, this would perspective on feminism for me, especially if this was part of the end result of the first movement.

Hillary supporters of both sexes. Sexism isn't the exclusive purview of women.

I was trying to find a deeper understanding of the gender. Sexism is way too divisive a topic right now 'round here, I was hoping to combat it with knowledge, atleast on my end. Sorry, I should have been more clear.

Anyways, I think a male is more prone to think about the individual parts of a mechanism (be it a team of people or something more concrete), and that leads to the mechanism failing because the parts don't work well together. I was wondering, if, in your opinion, there was a different outlook from a female?

anything.Why assume those are Hillary supporters?

and help calm down your over-the-top-insanely-angry fellow travelers at certain unmentioned websites. I was shocked today... I've never seen such hate, even on the rightest of righty sites.

Glad your heart is in the right place. Don't blame us if we can barely hear you past the hysterical screaming of your fellow travelers.

It has nothing to do with whether she is a woman.

She ran a lousy campaign. She has ignored party rules.

She has listened to the strategists until she doesn't know who she is.

Try to stop hating Hillary long enough to look at reality. If you honestly think there's no sexism displayed there, I submit this primary season has addled your brain.

that race played a part in the votes in WV last week and KY today ?

cause frankly, ive seen both racism and sexism during this primary. its sickening.

I too have seen both, and both displayed by the supporters of each candidate.

On edit: However, saying "But there's racism!" is not really an answer to the sexism arguments/discussions. They are both valid and both deserve discussion. One does not cancel out the other.

:thumbsup:

Misogyny and racism both arise from the fetid swamp known as the Patriarchy. The small group of old white (with sprinkling of non-white) MEN who run the world are laughing as they watch us peons fight over the scraps they throw us.

because I'm tired of the penis parade and not impressed with the latest manifestation of it, Mr. Obama.

Does this mean I won't wote for him? No.
Do I think he will win? No.
I'll hold my nose and vote for him.....

But I won't forget the sexism.
And I won't forget some of his supporters.
And I won't forget just how hard both Clintons fought for all of us since the moment they entered public life....

Thanks for your post....I can imagine this is not easy for you, just as it was hard for this Deaniac to rally behind Kerry in 2004....but rally I did and we must!!!

...but when it DOES come up, you better believe we'll confront it--on a person-to-person basis, of course.

There is a compulsion on the part of many here to bully Clinton supporters. This is what bullies do. Interesting that the ones who are guilty of this behavior haven't commented on your OP at all.

As much as I would like Obama to become the nominee, I have seen little purpose in all the "loyalty oath" requirements that have been posted.

I don't see them convincing anyone. At most annoy the ones that are on the fence and/or just need some time to get the primaries behind them.

with every single word.

Your vote is appreciated. I know what it's like to 'hold your nose' and vote for the nominee, it's not the most pleasant thing.

Again, thanks.

- as

pretending to be on each side and spitting out shit to keep us fighting.

I don't hate Hillary people, never have. I dislike Hillary just like you dislike Obama but I WOULD have voted for her to have a dem pres.

I wonder about the rabid Obama supporters on this site who will not take five minutes away from bullying Hillary supporters who just need to lick their wounds for a little while. They are only hurting their candidate.

I also, to be frank, wonder about Hillary supporters who say they won't vote for Obama in the general. I'm not sure they'd actually follow through, but to me it just seems like something people post for effect sometimes.

Provides enlightenment on at least one aspect:

The Obama campaign has done a better job of reassuring white men and women they won't be held accountable for past and current racial discrimination, than the Clinton campaign has of assuring men (and women in some cases) - or at least the media - that their past and current dickery won't be held against them.

Those who wrote early in the campaign about Obama's "bargain," were correct, IMO.

Can I add for Obama supporters, quit threatening me with Roe v. Wade? If you don't like Hillary's ad about national security because it's a scare tactic, you have no right to continually preach about Supreme Court nominees.

I feel this will be our best political season in decades. When those fruitcakes come around and slam Obama, we know what they are doing. We know they aren't you and that there are many more of you than there are of them. We slam them because they piss us off or because they are probably trolls. I think they spread lies and sew dissent intentionally and fighting those people is required much in the same way that many of us believe that fighting racism and sexism is required.

Just remember its not you, its them. Just let us do what we must.


P.S. are you done with sergio?

I've tried staying away from this part of DU lately - actually all parts (I miss the Lounge) - but only because I've been busy.

I also realized that my desire to "snark" was overwhelming my original intent in signing on here and continuing to contribute. That little voice in my head saying, "It's only a discussion board. No one knows who you are. Post the nasty!" I've tried to stop.

:kick:

This is getting a bit tiresome, that's for sure. It's almost like we have to take shit from you guys even after we've been taking shit from you guys for months. Do you really feel like Obama supporters are the only ones that have dished out any grief? I was an Edwards guy until he quit and then chose Obama and I have been called cultist, kool-aid drinker, worshiper, and a whole host of other things suggesting that I am an inexperienced, love-struck, ignorant child. All the sage "party loyalists" setting us straight, just like they did with Kerry.

I pushed back, that's the way it works, deal with it and quit implying that we need to kiss your asses cause I ain't doin' it.

Shove it.

Are you lost?

where are my kid gloves?

Geesh, it's getting pretty fucking tiresome. Nice to know there are others out there not willing to put on the lipstick and kiss ass.

We all need to remember that if a person lives in a SCARLET RED state, their vote is a spit in the wind. And, if a person lives in a ROYAL BLUE state, their vote is just another drop in the ocean. So maybe they can holler about not voting for Obama with impunity, because it won't affect very much and it's up to their conscience anyway. Voting for someone under duress is not really democratic, AFAIC. I'm a little tired of it. (I dreamed the other night that Oregon was shown as very light blue on an electoral map and I woke up feeling dismal. I don't think I can opt out of voting in the GE.)

In addressing those in swing states who wish to abstain from voting, and as to the remainder of your diatribe, I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of your post. :toast:

When, in actuality, because of the demographics, her supporters are probably die-hard Democrats.

I hope I would write the same thing if the situation were reversed, though would probab ly say "crap" instead of "damn" (crap is a favorite expression of mine).

:applause:

And I hope that as Barack takes on McCain, he'll start to win you over as well.

In fact, it damages the Women's Rights Movement by diminishing the discussion of true sexism.

and going home.

sexism is 'real' and what is 'fake?'

You know, your argument reminds me of conversations I have with some men over date rape and 'real' rape.

They seem to think that there's a substantive difference to the victim.....as if somehow, the victimizer should be judge of what is 'real', as opposed to the victim.

So now Hillary is the inevitable Victim??

Got it.

Reading for comprehension. Look into it.

your underwear is twisted

Is that Sexist?

.

and so called "progressive" men are as bad as any.

I try really hard to remember these jokers on DU do NOT represent all progressive men! :eyes: Thank goodness! :D

and start to froth.

I was an Edwards supporter, and I've spent the last few months watching both sides go after each other. It hasn't been pleasant to watch.

But, aside from the ugliness that goes on in GDP, when it became apparent that Obama is going to be our nominee, I looked up several of his speeches on youtube and CSPAN, and went out and read both his books. I read every bio and profile I could get my hands on, and watched him like a hawk when he was on TV. Now, I'm someone who's neither naive about politics nor easily swayed by charisma alone (I used to cover politics as a newspaper reporter, and I've also worked on a gubernatorial campaign). I understand some of the problems people have with him, I really do, but ultimately the good far outweighs the bad for me. I'm genuinely impressed with Obama, and will happily vote for him.

When I see posters talk about not trusting him, empty suit, etc. etc., I don't get it. I honestly don't. I sort of took that criticism at face value before I started researching Obama as a candidate, but I don't get that at all now. Not at all.

I understand that some of you strongly support Hillary, and also understand your anger over sexism (I recognize both that and the racism, but find the racism far more disturbing and ominous). But I do NOT understand those of you who passionately reject him as a candidate. He's deeply intelligent, intellectually curious, seems to me to be completely sincere in his ideals and objectives--acknowledging that no candidate is perfect, what's there to dislike so much?

I'm asking out of sincere curiosity, because you're one of the more reasonable posters here. :hi:

Have you ever had the experience where you're casual friends/acquaintances with someone and in the middle of a normal, everyday conversation, they do something shocking, like use the "n" word or tell you they hate those fags or say they think people who aren't Christians are going to burn in hell...whatever, but you get that cold water feeling down your spine and you're like, "Holy fuck, this person isn't who I thought they were AT ALL."

Well, that's what the Donnie McClurken incident was like for me. (And I'm not even gay!) A politician who would do that, who would actually sacrifice the most loyal voting block this party has in order to cuddle up to black evangelicals, who don't give a SHIT about 99% of the things we care about...his mask slipped and I saw him for who he was.

His inexperience is a huge turnoff for me. He said he would not run this term - he was in the STATE SENATE three years ago! He has no national political experience. Add to that the non-senator he's been (count up his "present" votes) and it turns out the nanosecond he's actually BEEN on the national stage doesn't count for much.

His harping that he "opposed the war" in Iraq (with the insinuation that he would have voted against the IWR if he'd had the chance, which, come on. Do we look stupid?) really grates on me. He was a state senator in a politically liberal area. It would have been politically bad for him NOT to oppose the war. It took no courage for him to make that speech.

Anyway, after The Speech, he said he would not run this term, preferring to gain experience. The fact that he allowed sycophants to convince him he should run points to an arrogance and naivete that is not likeable at all.

Then there was his performance in the debates. As far as I'm concerned, we need a big-time policy wonk to clean up the mess of the past 8 years. Hillary knows policy backwards and forwards. She just wiped the floor with him on all policy questions. He responded with an arrogance that was abrasive. When he got questions he didn't like, he got angry and showed it. That was the first time I thought, "Man, this guy is not electable. He will never make it through the rigors of a general election". He's been treated with such kid gloves by the media (other than 5 minutes on the Reverend Wright thing, and if you don't think THAT'S coming back to haunt us, you're crazy) and yet as soon as someone dared to cross the line he drew himself, he got pissed off and snotty.

Listen, I could write about this all day. Heh. He is deeply unlikeable, to me. I also have been around politics a long time and I don't think voters will respond to him positively. I don't think he's electable. And that's the MAIN reason I opposed his becoming the nominee.

But I only answered all this because you asked. I try not to trash him on DU anymore, because he's our presumptive nominee.

She "wiped the floor" with Obama on policy??? Did we watch the same debates? One of the few decent policy discussions during the ABC fiasco was about Social Security, and HE wiped the floor with HER. The truth is, she has no plan. SS is set to run out of money, and she hasn't even considered it enough to have an outline of a plan, because she knows a few tough choices would have to be made, and she'd rather put them off, she said she would have a "committee" look into SS, and even had the gall to say that's what Reagan had done, formed a committee to "look into it", to which Obama replied to the effect of "that committee cut benefits and raised the retirement age", and Clinton didn't have much to add after that. What else? Foreign policy? You mock Obama not being in the federal government at the time, but fail to be intellectually honest about it. He clearly would not have authorized the bloodbath we're now in in Iraq, and Hillary clearly did. And if she learned from that mistake, she sure didn't show it by signing Kyl/Lieberman.

Also, "she wiped the floor with him" is sexist.

So I answered. You and I disagree - big shocker! GO AWAY I'M VOTING FOR HIM.

It's mainly about Iraq for me. You wrote "It took no courage for (Obama) to make that speech (about Iraq)", but you are sorely mistaken. Everyone who stood up against the blatant lies and untruths being spun had real courage, every single one. Everyone and their grandmother knew what Iraq was about, and that it was bullshit, certainly everyone in Washington knew what it was about. Read Leahy's impassioned plea to Senators again. Every Senator knew the score. You want to talk courage? Casting that 'yes' vote on the IWR, and helping cause all of that death and destruction and misery, because it was the politically expedient thing to do, was about the most cowardly thing a politician could have ever done. It was ordering murder for no crime or reason for fear of being labeled "weak". You want to talk courage? When has Hillary ever shown any real courage except in fighting for herself?

When I said "it took no courage", I meant to say that it took no political sacrifice for him to make the speech. You're correct that every person who stood up against the illegal and immoral war showed courage. I heard his speech while I was driving in my car and I cheered out loud. It was a wonderful, inspiring speech.

Hillary has said she made the best choice she could based on the information she had, and the IWR was NOT a blank check for Bush to go to war. The administration lied to us, lied to congress. Colin Powell lied to the UN! They made a very good case that there was a credible threat. They said there was incontrovertible evidence. Hillary has said she wishes she could go back and change it. She can't, because we didn't know then what we know now.

The war is a travesty. I thought it was a shitty idea to invade Iraq even if they DID have WMD's. But that's why I'm not a senator - I don't have to make those hard choices.

Hillary Clinton has been an activist for 30 years. She's fought for MANY things that are near and dear to YOUR heart. It doesn't have to be black or white, you know. You don't have to hate her to think she's a terrible candidate. I can respect that.

I had exactly the same reaction to him, and the debates were what swung it for me.

I'm not buying what your selling. Got anything better? Besides cliche'?

I could go point by point but why bother, you're in the bag.

you get over it. Just saying you're voting for him while you parrot Hillarian memes doesn't cut it for me. So sorry. And stop yelling.

Shakespeare and I have both been on this website a very long time. She asked me a question and I answered her because she respects me and I respect her. You are behaving like an idiot. Now shoo - the grownups are talking.

how sweet. Save it. You started this farcical thread, deal with the blowback.

to 'blowback?' I mean, when posters start using anthromorphic gun imagery, I start pitying their obvious penile problems.....

Not that you need have a penis to have penile problems, mind you. I don't wish to assume your gender. But 'blowback?' Really.....

to 'blowback?' I mean, when posters start using anthromorphic gun imagery, I start pitying their obvious penile problems.....

Not that you need have a penis to have penile problems, mind you. I don't wish to assume your gender. But 'blowback?' Really.....

Clearly, I disagree with you on just about all of those points (especially RE the debates), but I'll respect your opinion and won't try to change your mind. I think we're each far too opinionated for that to happen. :7

All I will ask is that you read "The Audicity of Hope" if possible (it wasn't ghost-written, btw--that's his actual handiwork), and at least give him another chance. I was surprised by how strongly I've ended up liking him, and it just kills me to think other dems would view any eventual nominee as a "clothespin vote." I want EVERYONE to be excited about our nominee, and it wasn't easy for me to reach this point after Edwards broke my heart.

Clearly, something is clicking with voters--the numbers at that Portland rally this weekend just blew me away. And I don't think that's a fluke, and I don't think it'll peter out once the GE campaign gets going. I think there's something in his message, and a sincerity in him that people are seeing, that has excited voters in a way I've never seen in my lifetime. And I find that really moving. For now, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping it's real.

Regardless, though, I'm still glad you'll vote for him. :hi:

Edited to add one thing: The McClurkin thing bothers me, too. Having read his books, I would *like* to think that it's his native tendency to be inclusive that put him on that stage. I think it was a horrible mistake, but I think it was probably more a case of his hoping McClurkin will eventually have a change of heart, and not so much a case of political expediency.

it is because I know you are reasonable as well. :hi: Shouldn't we all be getting back to the lounge soon? :D

trolls will have little to do--it's to their benefit to stir the shit.

I have serious suspicions about some of the posters here these days. I take heart in knowing that most of the responses to this thread and others like it were sincere and respectful. It's only the couple of morons that make everyone else look bad. I try to remember they don't represent the average Obama supporter.

interest in disruption--it's not like McSame inspires debate, after all. It's just a matter of recognizing them.

Yes, the media is sexist. Yes many americans are sexist. However, that doesn't mean we all are or that everyone who votes against Hillary is sexist. I think most of us just see posts calling all Obama supporters sexist and we lose it. However, as an Obama supporter, some of the things I see my fellow Obama supporters say really pisses me off.

I'm sorry it anything that I have said here has made you feel at all uncomfortable.

and fyi, when a majority of us say that we "drink the kool-aid" it is in jest.

agree more.Some seem unable to get though the day without a hefty shot of DU melodrama.

VERY heavy and maybe broken heart.

I feel like that about Hillary. Frankly, I would LOVE to see her as president. I think she has what it takes. I'm a sucker for her brains. I have yet to see too many people anywhere else so richly equipped. If it weren't for Barack Obama, I'd be firmly in her column. I think she still has a MAJOR contribution to make, because 60 - (pardon the sexism but) for women is hardly a sentence to the proverbial old folks' home. I think it's "Far From Over" for her in MANY respects. And as a matter of fact, I myself do not think it's so outrageous to see her run again, eight years from now. I bet she's STILL gonna have what it takes even then.

I appreciate very deeply your willingness to pick up a new banner and carry it with us. I hope we in the Obama camp can be the beneficiaries of your energy, drive, sense of commitment, and willingness to work like crazy. You bring a LOT to the table. So does Senator Clinton.

I'm building a little "collection," if you will, because this is such a kick-ass year as far as historical American milestones. I sent away for a whole slew of Hillary campaign stuff (pins, bumper stickers, buttons) AND a corresponding collection of Barack campaign stuff, and I've stashed it away in the hiding place in which I start building the Christmas present pile. Among the things I'll be giving my son and daughter this Christmas is a collection of their own, each, of this stuff. It will be collector's-item worthy. BOTH Clinton AND Obama stuff. Those buttons and stickers and stuff from The First Woman Candidate for President, and The First African-American Candidate for President - are mementos of history. They'll each be able to show their kids souvenirs of this landmark era, while recalling what happened when they were growing up, and what they saw, and how they participated. Indeed, my daughter is old enough to vote in a Presidential Election for the first time. THIS is what she'll be voting in. One of these. One of these monumental, history-making FIRSTS. And Hillary is every inch a part of that. Every inch. Every molecule.

And when she says she will fight with all her heart to get The Democratic Nominee into the White House, I believe her, and I will be VERY grateful for her help. 'Cause we'll need it. And we'll STILL need her.

I have this weird thing about Hillary Clinton. I've posted about it here before. It struck me in a random moment immediately after Bill won the first time - that I was finally gonna have a First Lady to whom I could relate on a personal level. She was not that far from me in age, and she'd had quite a few of the same life experiences I'd had, growing up, becoming active, being a working mom, a college graduate, a business professional, VERY MUCH NOT a "Stepford wife," a woman with her own mind who wasn't afraid to speak up or speak out, and make as big a contribution as she dared. Granted, I'm a very small puff of smoke compared to what she's become (and built herself to be), but I could still relate to her. No more of these dumpy, dowdy, and disingenious old "national grandmas" or scheming tight-faced fashion-shrews - both so cold and forbidding that there was no way I could relate to either of them as a "grandmotherly" or elderly "auntie" figure. It was the first bond I ever felt with a First Lady. Hillary Rodham Clinton (and she even used her own name - as I did myself, carving out a separate-but-equal identity to her husband's) was NO meek little appendage. I REALLY liked and appreciated that, and it hit me immediately as soon as I stopped thrilling to the fact that Bill had won (FINALLY! OUT from under the damned republi-CONS and reagan/bushes!). And that was a pretty heavy moment for me. It's still huge. The fact that I'm still meditating on it, and moved by it, almost two decades later certainly tells me what a seminal moment that was when it first struck me, and what weight and heft it's had in my psyche, just in general.

I will never be able to distance myself from that. Whenever the name Hillary Clinton comes up, that's where I go first. Kinda like it's somewhere deep down in the ol' bone marrow, y'know? It's that deep and that systemic. You Hillary supporters have a great champion to stand with. I'm grateful to see you willing to step over to the Obama camp also. Hillary Clinton is STILL a GREAT CHAMPION, and a history maker. If she has not personally broken through that last big glass ceiling, she's certainly left a huge and irreparable crack in it, and she's made it easier, more possible, and more plausible - and NO LONGER UNTHINKABLE - to break in the future, whether it's she who comes back around for another try or another woman who does so. The presidential campaign landscape is NOT the same. She's changed it permanently, all by herself, whether Barack Obama was there or not. We have a glass ceiling now irretrievably weakened, its structure cracked and compromised. Because of her. Barack did the same thing for Americans and all future candidates of color. Because of him, it's no longer unthinkable that a non-white person might run seriously and credibly for the highest office in the land. And because of her, it's no longer unthinkable that a woman would do so, either.

We owe a GREAT DEAL of gratitude to them both, regardless who winds up as the last one standing. They're BOTH winners already, as are we all. She's already won one - a BIG one - for you, janesez. And for me. And for all Americans, for all of history.

shut up, that is.

can't promise, but I'll try.

also i hope you can look deeper, learn more and come to find a better view of him as our candidate and future president.

serious kudos to you!
gg

and very disappointed in her personally but i would/will vote for her....who else would i vote for-i`m a democrat

I was born and raised a Democrat. That will never change.

either candidate, but have come to despise the tactics of the Clinton campaign. Their misjudgment and mishandling of the primaries out of sheer arrogance has been astounding and have convinced me that her presidency would be little different. The over-spending, the in-fighting, all of it. That said, I was always committed to voting for the Democrat. Always. Even living as I now do, far away from home. Because who is in the WH has severe ramifications not only for my fellow countrywomen (and men), but for the entire world. It is interesting to me that Obama has so much support right around the world, and fascinating to hear why from people around me here who are perhaps more 'objective' and less invested in the personality debates of the campaign.

i think the world will finally accept the fact that america has finally grown up. after all we are a new country in the grand scheme of things...

"But, as we entered Iowa, we crossed the frozen cornfields to start the winter campaign. The fighting quickly became intense. Some volunteers fled from the harshness of battle and many reinforcements simply never showed up. After scoring a few early victories, we went for weeks and weeks without a single victory. It was a drought that nearly caused all of us to give in.

But then, early last month, we beat them back and scored a huge victory. Spring was a'coming, and we found our newfound strength as the blossoms were on the apple trees. Those bitter cold days were over and we felt the sun on our faces and on our backs for the first time in many months. We went into battle with a new refreshed outlook, but still there were no reinforcements. Then, as we suffered some deserters, important men to be sure, but ones who would no longer be there in the fight beside us.

The Spring campaign was well underway, yet we were only scoring battles that barely kept us even with our losses. Oh, we gave them hell, to be sure, but it seemed that every time we had a victory, we suffered a loss as well. Our morale was low when we found out how just far into debt we had sunk by the first of April, the Fools Day. Nevertheless, we trudged onward never looking back. It didn't matter how far we had to go now, we had nowhere left to return to.

Maybe I can get leave to visit you later this summer Ma.

Lovingly your son,
Corporal Thomas O'Gillicutty
1st regiment, 1st Division, 1st Army

May 20th, 1864"

*as read by Morgan Freeman*

Something more is being demanded of people than merely a commitment to vote for the nominee - as awful as that suppressive and undemocratic behavior is.

It is not merely loyalty being asked for, but conformity and compliance. It is almost impossible to have an intelligent discussion, because anything that even hints at anything less than total conformity can be portrayed as "not loyal to the presumptive nominee" which therefore means "not loyal to the party" which therefore means "supporting the Republicans" and perhaps a troll, or a racist, or a freeper, but definitely a despicable enemy. That then is used to purge people if they refuse to be silenced.

People are taunted - they express any criticism of the party or the nominee and the jeers start - "what are you gonna do? Vote for McCain?" There point of view will not be tolerated, and it is any wonder under those circumstances that some in frustration and anger say that they in fact will not vote for the nominee?

Of course, as Democrats, we stick around and take the abuse because we are loyal and because we still have some remaining hope of being heard. That is now being pushed to the breaking point, and the growing divide in the party is becoming more and more obvious. The more aggressive and hostile the demands for conformity, the threats of being purged, the more alienated people are becoming.

The general public does not have loyalty to the party, does not have a hope of persuading people in the party, and so the bullying tactics that to some degree work here will cause an even bigger backlash from the public if we are not careful.

Notice that more and more the theme is becoming not one of bringing people in, but rather of identifying and eliminating the dissidents. If we keep saying "who needs 'em!!!" long enough, people will get the message that they are not wanted, will not be heard, and they will leave. We will then have a very pure, but very small movement and a vastly weakened party. Unity achieved by forcing out all those who will not properly unify has more in common with a religious or spiritual movement than it does a political movement.

and you, my friend, should make this its own OP.

Thank you for your thoughtful, and accurate, message.

I'm not sure my OP deserves it! :D

You were my inspiration. :toast:

Not only my biological sisters, but all sisters, and I believe that anyone who threatens their rights and equality should be knocked down.

I love all my Hillster friends, both here and in the real world.

I believe Barack shares the same sentiment. I believe he will fight for you.

Let's give him the chance, if he fails, we can all call him on it.

All 4 One.

but it was more or less a wash in this campaign. White women over 60 were Hillary's base nearly everywhere. There is nothing anymore wrong with that than the fact that black voters were a large and consistent part of Barack's base where ever they constituted a significant part of the population.

If anything, sexism, to the extent it occurred or was perceived, most likely drove Hillary's base to turn out in record numbers. Nothing wrong with that either. The notion that the result of the primaries is the product of sexism is rather stretching the numbers to fit a rationalization. Hillary did far better than the men (white men) that voted for the war. If you haven't noticed, white men have had a significant advantage in these contests in the past. None fared too well this time.

Glad to hear you will vote for the nominee. I have certainly voted for many I would not have chosen over the last 35 years.

Seriously, that would be a hilarious bumper sticker or sig line or something. :rofl:

There have been three candidates in my voting lifetime that I can remember being genuinely thrilled to vote for: Paul Simon (was that the '88 primaries? I can't remember the exact year now), Al Gore in 2000, and Wes Clark in the 2004 primaries. But anyone with a (D) after their name gets my complete support.

:rofl:

Just had to say that, and bounce it up to the top once again.

:kick:

The 14yo girl tone fits GDP nicely.

:)

& ZombyRecommended. :thumbsup:


























"I agree! nt"

but clintonism. did you forget the 90's.

in Iowa, driving there all the way from Kansas.

I felt that Kerry was never as good a candidate, but of course I voted for him rather than Worst. President. Ever.

Obama has been very gracious to Clinton and her supporters.

We need everyone to pull together to win in November.

Right on. :thumbsup:

when people bring it up in the context of being willing to vote for McCain because they feel their candidate has been discriminated against. That is why we are discussing it.

But I have to say that overall you make some great points and I'm happy to recommend. Sometimes it seems (on both sides) that everything is a fight in this forum and it doesn't need to be.