A Question For Angry Hillary Supporters

If the situation today were precisely reversed, if Hillary were in Barack's place and she were in his--what would you be saying about Florida and Michigan, what would you be saying about superdelegates overriding the popular vote, what would you be saying about electability in the swing states?

If you can honestly say that you would be arguing these issues the same way, even though they were working in Obama's favor--then OK. But if you know in your heart that you would be supporting the positions Obama is now taking simply because, under the terms of this thought experiment, they would favor Hillary--then contemplate the meaning of that fact.

It means that your anger is not really based on a violation of principle but on a disappointment of preference.

I hope Hillary's people will realize this, given a little time, and the best interests of our wounded and betrayed nation will prevail. We must not let this opportunity slip away.

Comments

[arthuride]

Zengotitia has it wrong. It has nothing to do with "preference". It has everything to do with EXPERIENCE. Obama lacks all experience. He is not only lacks any knowledge of international affairs, except to visit with terrorists, but has no clue about the economy in the USA.

As a life long Democrat who has never voted for a Republican or third party candidate, that will change this November. I will vote against Obama because he is the worse possible candidate and the most ignorant in the political arena. Obama is a loser.

[leogorcey]

Rumsfield was experienced. Same for Cheney, Bush, Rice, Powell, Wolfiwitz , Kissinger, Nixon, Paetreus,, Gen. William Westmoreland, Rove, Atwater, Carvelle, Sen. Hillary Clinton,the majority of House/Senate members, Brokaw, Couric, Stephanopolus, Gibson, Russert, Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, etc., etc.,etc..

Yet they all helped seal America's Doom in Iraq. Gee, I wonder who the inexperienced people were? I wonder what they wanted us to do?

[Johnnn]

Obama has no chance. The Great Democratic Party is blowing another one.

[leogorcey]

McCain is such a bad candidate that I think that the kid who bags my groceries could beat him.

[JXB]

Suggest you read this:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/mccain_needs_vision_to_beat_hi.html

Clinton and her campaign operatives have always understood that the winner of the Democratic nomination would almost certainly become President given the current political environment and historical political data. That is in part why the Clinton campaign held on for so long, and fought so hard in such a destructive way, to get the nomination. And it is also why the "electability" argument that were part of that effort were so fundamentally disingenous at their core. In a sense, the Democratic primary really was for "all the marbles."

[dana94591]

I am so angry at the disrespect that Hillary has given Barack last night. If she had been the victor I wonder how she would have felt to have the loser in a fair contest NOT give her blessing to the democratic result of the contest waged???? She is a piece of work!!! I can't dislike her enough right now.

[myskylark]

This blog misses the point. My anger is not over the mechanics of the campaign. My own argument to crazed
Four years ago Obama was an Illinois State Senator. Before he was in the U.S. Senate for one year, he was running for president.

I'm angry because Obama is unqualified, unaccomplished and had much more dues to pay before running. He jumped into this race which resulted in pitting one historic candidate against another. This had to end in deep party division.

I'm not ready to forgive and forget no matter who asks me to.
I don't feel at home in this party, with its back-stabbers and ingrates coming out of the woodwork. There are so many politicians in this country who were so glad to accept Clinton's help with fund-raising and campaigning. Harry Truman was right. If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.

[bkcarter87]

I seem to remember another candidate from Illinois who ran for President. He, too, lost his mother at an early age and had a strained relationship with his father. And, like Obama, his religious beliefs were a matter of controversy. He also served 4 terms as a Representative in the Illinois State Legislature and 1 term in Congress. His name was Abraham Lincoln.
I also know someone who served for 6 years as a Congressional Staff Assistant; 2 years as White House Chief of Staff; served 6 terms in Congress; served 4 years as Secretary of Defense and 7 years as Vice President for a total of 31 years of Washington experience. That man is, of course, Dick Cheney.
So I hate to disagree with you on that experience thing, myskylark, but I'll take wisdom over experience any day.

[dana94591]

Ditto!!! All the experience in the world could not have helped this crew!!!!

[belikejeanvaljean]

It was the voters in the Democratic primaries who elected him the nominee, differing with you, apparently, on whether he has enough experience. So you are angry at them? Or are you angry at Obama simply because he ran against Hillary (as did a number of other Dems, some of whom - Biden, Dodd - had worlds more experience than she) for the nomination?

[CCW4ME2]

But Hillary did clobber Obama by up to 4:1 in areas of Pennsylvania and other states that represent the real America. Hillary has great appeal to voters who hold core American values.

[belikejeanvaljean]

It is this type of arrogant dismissal of those who disagree with/didn't vote for Hillary that helped doom her candidacy. Even now, she still doesn't get it.

[Veneita]

But according to the rules, she DIDN'T WIN.

[GManPhx]

Real America to you equals Pennsylvania, Kentucky, West Virginia?

North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, Kansas, Illinois, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, Texas, Iowa don't really count, do they?

You better pay attention in Social Studies next year!

[arthuride]

I live in Iowa. I was Democratic Chair of Hardin County. Obama did not carry all the counties. The counties Clinton carried tend, historically, to carry the state--and these counties, like Hardin County, vote red. Obama will lose Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Montana, South and North Dakota, and the nation in the end--not because of his race, but because he has next to no experience and continues to divide the nation. The GOP will control Congress and the Presidency for the next 8 years because of the divisive politics of the Obamacrats. And as a life long Democrat, I will be among the millions of Democrats who will vote against Obama.

[IndependentTogether]

So... unless we live in Appalachia, we are not "real Americans"? Iowa, Illinois, Oregon, the Carolinas, etc. aren't part of the "real America"? And... the 17M who *didn't* vote for Clinton are anti-American?

[k8eeyore]

Excuse me, please tell me you are not saying that the only 'real' Americans are those who live in the Rust Belt. I'm a real American, and I hold core American values. Hillary does not appeal to me. And if you're saying I'm not a real American because of where I live and who I voted for, then go screw yourself.

[wellinformed08]

Don't be too hard on them (Hillary supporters). This is what Hillary, Bill, Howard, Terry and the rest of them feed to their supporters. They are the only real constintuecies. The rest of us are small and insufficient. It's all small and crap.

[Bramptonian]

Excellent question!! If only we could be honest.

[greejambri]

MR. DE ZENGOTITA, good post. Unfortunately you're asking something of Hillary supporters that they are categorically incapable of -- empathy. It's one of the primary traits of a narcissistic personality, the inability to put oneself in someone else's shoes. Hillary is the Queen of Narcissism and her legions are loyal followers.

[nuglet304]

that's an amazingly rovian response to a piece that was intended to incite unity and understanding. but i guess it's to be expected.

[wellinformed08]

So Clinton supporters recognize Rovian Tactics .....and still they fall for them- I DIGRESS!

[OtayPanky]

I don't have super-strong positive feelings about Obama. But I do have super-strongnegative feelings about the Clintons. Every time I allow myself to think about those terminal narcissists back in the White House, I throw up in my mouth a little (and I voted for him twice, before I knew better).

NONETHELESS - if it had come down to Hillary vs McCain, I would have swallowed my vomitus and voted for her - because after eight years of Bushco, the country is redlining. We need national healthcare, we need to be out of Iraq, we need to re-balance the Supreme Court - and we need to bring a final end to the Reagan Revolution.

But that's just me. Everyone has to think it through for him or herself.

[SlithyTove]

Pithy...yet it won't resonate with your target audience...pity.

[DanoS]

Thomas - your point has been proven to be true by none other than Clinton herself. She stated the MI & FL primaries would not count! Now that she needs the delegates, the arguement changed to benefit her position. In any she got what what she wanted, they seated the degates fairly, by what the states of FL & MI proposed, but per the rules OF the DNC by having the delegates.

One last point, halving the delegates does not discout the voters either as noted by Ickies - it's an inacurate arguement.

You said it perfectly "It means that your anger is not really based on a violation of principle but on a disappointment of preference."

[Researchguy66]

Hillary hasn't lost yet and she can't lose until the convention simply because the supers can't vote untili then.

All it's going to take is for Michelle Obama to bare those fangs and actually bite someone and Hillary will be the nominee.

[arthuride]

Michelle Obama is the greatest liability her husband has--outside of his lack of experience--and has turned off more voters in swing states and in traditionally blue states than even Jeremiah Wright. The only chance Obama might ever have is if he had the good sense and sufficient intelligence to divorce Michelle and get him out of his wife. She is a shrew at best. one who proclaimed without hesitation that she was never proud to be an American. The USA does not need this hate-filled woman.

[SanityClaus]

Don't bother with this troll. He's a Rethuglican who thinks sowing discontent among Democrats will help Grandpa Simpson win the election.

[belikejeanvaljean]

Will Hillary admit defeat even at the convention? Or will she hold out hope, even as Obama is campaigning against McCain in the fall, that "something could happen" even then to make her the replacement nominee?

[wheresthebeef]

So much for an appeal to logic.

[LABC]

God, you are a sad little man....

[Researchguy66]

Which popular vote would the superdelegates be overriding? The one that counts actual votes cast or the one that apportions delegates in an undemocratic way?

[SanityClaus]

McCain employee trying to stir the pot and whip up Clintonistas into such an abject state of self-pity that they'll be stupid enough to vote Rethuglican. Don't bother arguing with it.

[tjntn]

Politicians run campaigns to win elections. They know the rules ahead of time and work to get what is needed to win. In the Democratic nomination, it's delegates that determine the winner. Clinton and Obama both went after delegates. Clinton lost so she is trying to change the rules.

Besides, only the most convoluted count of the popular vote puts Clinton ahead. Quoting Andrew Romano yesterday in Newsweek, "In the end, only 384,578 Puerto Ricans cast ballots, meaning that Clinton's monster margin translated to an actual gain of only 141,662 votes. That's simply not enough to overcome Obama in any fair national vote tabulation--and by fair, we mean "any tabulation that awards Obama more than zero votes in Michigan," where his name wasn't on the ballot. If we include Florida...and the caucus states of Iowa, Nevada, Maine and Washington (where votes weren't counted and must, therefore, be estimated), Obama leads by 134,746; if we disenfranchise those caucus states--which represent a net Obama gain of about 110,000 votes--he's still ahead by 24,524. What's more, if we give Clinton her 330,000 Michigan votes and award Obama all 237,000 of the uncommitteds--a flawed but roughly equitable proposal, seeing as experts project that the Illinois senator would've won a standard Great Lakes State primary by 80,000--he emerges with a lead of 44,605." So you see, even if we changed the rules to a fair popular vote, Obama would be the