Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Ding ding ding

It just never ceases to amaze me how many people on this site and others are so puzzled over why Hillary still wins elections. Must be some sort of trick, some device that made it happen, right? Like bad coverage from CNN for Obama - and that is really rich, by the way. Last weekend, when showing Bill Clinton stumping in Ohio, CNN's headline was "Help From Hubby." Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall CNN tagging a segment on Michelle Obama with "Help From Wifey."

The fault, dear Obama supporters, is not in the stars but in yourselves - Hillary won because more people voted for her, because outside of the invective-filled echo chamber Clinton haters live in, there are lots of people in this country who find her to be a smart, capable politician who would make a fine president. And they vote. Yeah, stupid voters....

Posted by DKDC
March 5, 2008 11:58 AM Permalink


Comments (28)

Yeah, more Rush Limbaugh supporters.

avatar

They just don't get it. They view everything from the prism of their own experience and have nothing but contempt for those who do not see it the way they do. They complain that Clinton is practicing a scorched earth policy, and I have never seen supporters of any candidates act more like the wingnuts than the Obama supporters on this board. Even in the face of all evidence to the contrary they'd rather stick to their own version of events. They can't imagine that anyone else in this country can vote for another candidate because they like her policies, or believe she'd be a better candidate or even admire her. When Obama criticizes Clinton he's taking the high road, when Clinton criticizes Obama she's using "Rovian tactics".

Obama has released one tax return from one year but Clinton is hiding her tax return, they want to see it, and if you ask them why, they can't answer you - because they don't know why, they just parrot whatever they hear. Any wealth the Clintons have accrued just had, HAD to come from some payoff or something. If Clinton won in the last primary races, it was because republicans voted for her, never mind the biggest democratic turnout in years, no, it had to be Rush Limbaugh's "endorsement" of Clinton. Even when they're still winning they can't stop themselves.
They accuse her of doctoring photos, of racism, if she stands up for herself she's whining, if she doesn't she's playing the victim card. They really do believe that this is the worst campaign they've ever seen - they don't have a clue.

avatar

I think for some Obama supporters this is the first Primary campaign they've participated in or paid attention to. I'm amazed at how calm and low key this primary season has been especially considering how close it is. This is probably the nicest democratic season I've seen and i've been watching since carter. Did anyone watch the republican debates? I did and they were a lot nastier then the democratic fight.

avatar

We had a primary race here in Ohio in my district that was one of the ugliest races I've ever seen. Dr. Victoria Wulsin was accused by her opponent of taking part in Mengele type experiments - and they think a ringing phone is negative?

Obama's wife isn't the former President of the United States.

Just look at what you're saying! You've riled yourself enough to make a blog comment about a minor point of political coverage that doesn't mean squat in the big scheme of things.

The liberal political blogosphere has spun itself dizzy much worse than the political media ever did in my lifetime. The Hillary/Obama polarization you have convinced yourself of does not exist anywhere near as strongly in the majority population.

Hillary has old high negatives that she carries with her, beyond that, people are open to her. McCain has new negatives being painted as a "liberal" by conservatives, those negatives aren't such bad negatives as far as a general race is concerned. Obama is a question mark, has a high ceiling but also a low floor, lots of room for people to develop negatives or positives.

I think the blogsophere has spun itself that the rest of the population sees a big difference between these three candidates and will have the same passions they do. Many will be changing their minds in the future.

Reading over the long thread on Clinton's win on the front page, I was reminded of the anecdotals from my own Democratic family back in Wisconsin right before their open primary. None were strongly decided between Clinton or Obama, were going to go with their feelings in the voting booth the next day, could see benefits in either. My Gen X brother was even considering McCain as well until I pressed him about how hawkish his core values were. My father, with lingering racist feelings from his youth, was leaning strongly towards Obama, I think out of guilt.

I look at polls and I see how soft Obama's support has been to date jump out at me, simply because people have been giving him a "he's new" break, looking to see how he's going to turn out.

A lot of you are really spinning yourself silly. Go somewhere else besides the blogosphere for a slice of reality, things are not as polarized as you think, especially not divided between Hillary supporters and Obama supporters. People are simply happy to have two strong Dem choices.

avatar

Either democrat will win the general election. I believe Obama will get the nomination, but Clinton is better staged to beat McCain because she can carry Ohio, New York and California. Obama's strong point is picking up independents. McCain's a republican, how much worse can it get for him? Okay, Bush's endorsement today might be worse...

Hillary's negatives predate and transend Obamamania. Amongst my aquaintences, friends and family there is a majority that simply will not vote for Clinton. Some of them really like Obama others are just supporting the non-Hillary democrat. I know people for whom Obama is their third choice but they will vote for him because they are yellow dog democrats but they think that she is worse than a yellow dog.

avatar

This is a great example of what I was saying - "his family" as though no one else might not think the same.

One of the few reality-based blog posts here in weeks:

What to do when you have a soft corner for all three - Sen. McCain, Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/what-to-do-when-you-have-a-sof.php

She has a record of 13 wins 24 losses and 1 tie. Woot! Excelt work there Hillary! Not only will that not get you to the finals, it is not even a respectable showing. Where she wins she also does not run the score up the way he does on her. Where are her 2:1 and 3:1 victories? She gets 3 days of good press out of this and then Obama will spank her two more times to set the stage for Pensylvania. If they spin her narrow victory in TX and respectable margin in OH as game changing how will they spin Obama's ratios of victory Saturday and Tuesday?

avatar

because outside of the invective-filled echo chamber Clinton haters live in

I don't know why these arguments can't be made without the word "hate" in them...anyway...

I do understand why lots of people are "so puzzled over why Hillary still wins elections." She's a polarizing person. She has high negatives. That makes it puzzling.

And, if you ask me, those factors make her just as much of a risk in the GE as Obama's "newness."

These primary races don't mean anything in terms of winning against a Republican.

You are exactly right. I find Obama inspirational and Hillary sets of my scumbag radar just like Romney did. I understand that for others it is exactly the oposite but cannot understand what they see any more than they can understand what I see.

I also do not understand people who judge candidates solely based on issue positions. To me Issue postiions are like looks in a prospective date. Once the individual has met the minimum acceptable standard being better just does not get them much. there are so many other factors like do I think that they can get their agenda implemented. I truely believe that Hillary cannot because she is all about the inside the beltway wheeling and dealing. I think that the kind of changes I want to see cannot be achieved that way. I think it takes a citizens movement and that she not only cannot lead one she does not see the value in one. She has a paternalistic view of power where it is all about what she can do for us. Obama is about what he can lead us to do. I think it is the only method that will work.

I am an old woman in Ohio. Here's what I read about myself today just in this thread:

[SNIP}

Good thing I'm not a sensitive person.

And by the way, I voted for Obama yesterday, for various reasons. But I'm getting really, really sick of the Kewl Kidz trashing everyone who didn't.

Actually, people probably voted for Clinton here because they thought she'd be a better president for them. She's smart, tough, hard-working, and good on details. She's not glamorous, silver-tongued, or cool -- and, as those posters above make gratingly clear, neither are we. Working people, poor people, blue-collar people, retired people, old people -- we're definitely not very cool.

But we vote. Dammit, we do show up and vote....


Posted by HLee
March 5, 2008 4:05 PM

read it in full @

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/05/whyd_she_win/#comment-2632415

avatar

You know what's amazing about this - when voters are polled, their reasoning for voting for a candidate is that they agree with their policies.

And as I note in another post Hillary is close behind in being "inspirational" and leads in being commander like and being in charge on the economy.

avatar

From what I've discerned in the campaigns, Obama teases Hillary's normal supporters and then they reject him and go and vote for Hillary. Obama can attract these folks and keep them by a side for a bit.

But then too many of them don't hear what they need to hear and they boogie right on out of the Obama circle and vote for Hillary.

My fellow Obama supporters think this can be ignored. It can't be. Obama's make or break race is in Pennsylvania. Has has to close the deal with enough of these folks. If he does, he will get the Prez nomination. If he can't, he can go back to the Senate or settle for VP.

My two cents...

Good example of a pro-Obama blogger playing the divisive game, Feb. 26:

Breaking: Mondale Insider, Old White Lady Carries Water for DLC Insider, Old White Lady
by Veronica Corningstone

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/02/breaking-mondale-insider-old-w.php

I can't imagine Obama would have condoned that, it sort of the anti-thesis of what he sells. That's that point, though. I think that many pro-Obama bloggers are the ones taking bait from the Hillary campaign, bait that's really standard stuff, and doing damage to Obama with it. Spinning not only themselves silly but causing damage in the process. Spinning has to be done by pros with message discipline. All these "volunteers" are just doing nothing by causing confusion and damage. I always hoped that the blogosphere could be used to deconstruct spin, instead I see it being used to create incompetent amateur examples in mass quantities that are not only doing damage to candidates they are purporting to support, but to the party itself.

avatar

Except that you're deconstructing spin right now.

:-)

Really, I don't think it's an absolute situation. The blogosphere, like the wave of "social networking" software that is everywhere these days, offers us a paradoxical paradigm. This "amateurism" is liberating and democratizing us, just as it's simultaneously debilitating and controlling and diffusing our power.

(I hope to post something on this elsewhere one of these days...still winding it around my head...)

avatar

Maybe you're right but any viable alternative to the open communication the internet now allows us is much worse than changing sites when things get too much.

avatar

Artappraiser:

Timely reference to an excellent post. Thanks. It never ceases to amaze me that people do not understand how capable and eminently on-the-ball Hillary Clinton is. I've always said and still say that, even though we all, yes all of us, rallied behind John Kerry, who "voted for the war" in the same way HRC did, I can still respect and understand those who now say they cannot vote for someone like HRC who voted for the war. That's a moral position and I respect that.

Those who choose to focus on Clinton's competence or alleged lack thereof, or who sound like Ken Starr in their critique of HRC, or who never learned that political correctedness can sometimes be annoying but applying it to women should not be based on one's political leanings, are placed by me in a very different category of voter and person.

Bruce

avatar

You know, they complain of her high negativities, but Hillary Clinton has consistently polled in the top 10 most admired women in America for years. She also polls in the top for the most admired women of the world. Some of these people really do fail to see this objectively. They think because they dislike her everyone must dislike her.

Hi, Bruce.

avatar

Hey Bev. Hanging in there?

avatar

I ain't that old but I've been around long enough to have voted in every election since 1980 (just missed '76). This race is just like, in so many ways, the Hart/Mondale race in '84. Folks like me were thrilled with Senator Hart and his call for change and new ideas, and I remember starting to loathe good ole' Fritz Mondale and his, get this, red telephone commercials.

I can tell you that, come October of 1984, I stood with tens of thousands in the cold autumn winds of Wisconsin to await the arrival of Fritz. He was my guy and I loved him like I never loved Gary Hart.

Point is things change and so too do attitudes. Haters of BHO and haters of HRC might keep their hate when it's all over. But when that right-wing attack machine gets going, I think for most real progressives, and I do I mean the real kind, things start to change, and they change quickly.

So then why is Obama winning more?

Please try to answer that without resulting to Clinton talking points.

If Clinton winning says something good about her (and it does), then doesn't Obama winning more say something better about him?

(Also, doesn't this risk a vicious circle?)

avatar

In the beginning of this run to the presidency, I tried to keep an open mind. I favored Obama somewhat because I thought it was time to put a new face on America, but I tried to be informed and make an intelligent decision when I voted. I read, I watched and over time I came to the conclusion that both Hillary and Bill Clinton have an incredible talent for stating the most untruthful things as facts and allowing everyone around them (including the press) believe they are true. They don't flinch, they don't back down, and they can spin better than just about anyone in the business. It's quite astonishing really. Now mind you, I voted for WJC twice and am not out to denigrate HC. What I've realized is that age, wisdom and the luxury of time have made me a much more informed voter. Obama supporters may sometimes be overzealous in supporting their candidate and bashing his opponent, but I remember doing the same thing when I was young -- before I was turned off by politics -- however, not all Obama supporters are young. There are some of us old folks out here, too. I have admired Sen. Obama's obvious discomfort at going negative, and I hate to see it happen, but someone has got to get the truth out in a timely manner so that Clinton lies don't hit at crucial times and linger in the air as voters go to the polls. Sen. Clinton is a smart woman and a capable person, but she is not as superior to Sen. Obama as she has led people to believe. It's time to change the narrative on her record.

avatar

As a fellow Obama supporter, then I suggest that it is time for Obama to start battling in a smart way. Fix Rezko--hold news conferences until this damned thing DIES. Then go forward and create great ads (fire the agency you have now since they apparently cannot create a memorable ad) addressing the tribal costume photo, the hidden Muslim nonsense, the doesn't know when to salute crap, etc.

What exactly is the hold-up that Obama cannot get out in front of these issues. He has the volunteers; he has the money; he apparently has a good staff. What EXACTLY is the hold up?

I am getting frustrated--with Obama.

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe



Cafe Features


August 18-22

Book Cover

September 1-4

Book Cover

September 8-12

Book Cover

September 15-20

Book Cover

October 6-12

Book Cover





Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Al Shaw



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address