Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
My fellow Clintonites, it's time for Obama
The Boston Globe
My fellow Clintonites, it's time for Obama
By Tripp Jones
April 5, 2008
http://tinyurl.com/4ns3rb
Excerpts:
"FOR SUPPORTERS of Senator Hillary Clinton, like me, it's time to get behind her rival, Senator Barack Obama."
"We have an opportunity to show that we have learned from our mistakes. The first step, which Obama took in his recent speech on race, was to condemn Wright's offensive rhetoric.
"The second step is in our hands: Strengthen Obama as the Democratic nominee by uniting behind him now."
"Those of us who have supported Clinton and continue to believe that she would be an excellent president can play an important part in moving our nation forward by supporting Obama. We can spread the word that he offers the right leadership for these challenging times."
Comments (24)
Actually, it's not that time... yet. The process has to play out and HRC has to voluntarily step aside. We're still in the primaries, and people still should be picking the Dem candidate of their choice. Calls for HRC to step down are just alienating her supporters and making it less likely that they'll support Obama. Not to say we won't come together by November, but telling HRC supporters to step aside now will increase the time it will take to bring us together. The time to come together will be when we have a nominee. We'll be there by July 1 and then we'll have four months to bring the HRC supporters over to Obama.
In the meantime, let's try not to demean supporters of either candidate who are making a well-intentioned primary race decision. We're all entitled to our choice here and all need to work together to defeat McCain once we have a nominee.
April 5, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well argued. But I still think Tripp has the right idea.
April 5, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think what Tripp has the right idea about is the notion that all Dems should see the Wright imbroglio for what it is (an effort to tar Obama with guilt by association and a dog whistle for racists) and stop dividing ourselves on the basis of Wright. I'm not going to call for HRC supporters to stand down, but I would like to suggest that making arguments for HRC based on Wright are a really bad idea. If you make up your mind now that Obama absolutely should not be president based on his association with Wright, then, no matter how strong your Democratic loyalty, then you really can't vote for Obama when he's the nominee. How many HRC supporters have now put themselves in a position of having to do a 180 and recant their anti-Wright rhetoric between now and November?
I agree with Tripp that, as progressives, we need to put the Wright situation in perspective and take from it a motivation to work to change the public's perceptions of race in this country, both for what it could mean to change the way Wright is compelled to speak and for the way it can help overcome an irrational prejudice among voters against electing an AA candidate. Obviously, I can't tell an HRC voter how to think, but I'd like to try to help get the Wright meme in perspective so it's not still dividing Dems in the fall. One way for that to happen would be for HRC herself to address the issue in from a more positive perspective and not simply as a way to bash Obama.
April 5, 2008 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could you maybe bring up Wright 10 more times? How about this -- a humble suggestion:
WRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHTWRIGHT
Is that better?
April 5, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
And your point? If you think the story is going away you're pretty delusional. Better to talk about it and strategize for it now than to wish it away until the Repub 527's bring it front and center for the GE.
April 5, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
WRight
April 5, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ms Hillary dose not have to step aside....absolutely not!
We liberal progressives need to get behind Mr. Obama...NOW.
Eventually Ms Hillary's support will be less than evident and...she will get the message....and do what's in her best interest.
April 5, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am an Obama supporter and I don't think the prolonged primary is hurting the eventual nominee. I think HRC should stay in as long as she wants to. She is helping Obama by exposing him to Republican style attacks early. She is depriving McCain of the element of surprise. Only one claim, Rev. Wright, has stuck. The NAFTA claims was proven false although it probably did hurt his results in Ohio. Obama handled the Wright controversy well but he will have to continue to handle it if he is nominated.
McCain goes unopposed. When his (many) flaws are exposed closer to November, he will have less time to refute them.
Fight on Senator Clinton. If you win the nomination, I'll probably vote for you.
April 5, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard Hillary today, shouting that the race is "neck and neck." I've seen neck and neck horse races, but I've never seen a political race that was neck and neck, except Gore/Bush, which was nullified by the Supreme Court.
How is Hillary Neck & Neck with Obama? I thought that term referred to a race where they each have an equal chance of winning -- fairly --(without one putting a foot out to trip the other one up).
Could she be lying again?
April 5, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give HRC some slack on that one. She has to say what keeps her supporters believing she has a chance. And if you consider the percentage margin in pledged delegates, it's really very close. Obviously, close won't cut for actually getting the nomination, but it's true that she has not been blown out of the water in the pledged delegate count. In the end, the SDs aren't going to buy the horse race analogy anyway, so why begrudge her her opinion?
April 5, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
GMan08, I hear ya. And agree.
"One way for that to happen would be for HRC herself to address the issue in from a more positive perspective and not simply as a way to bash Obama."
How she handles her eventual loss is going to be interesting to watch.
April 5, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
eamseneca, points taken.
April 5, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
GMan, it is so good to hear a Clinton supporter put the Wright "issue" into perspective. Thanks for the bridge-building post ...
April 5, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha... I'm an adamant Obama supporter. But also a huge Democrat first, candidate second, voter.
April 5, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gman, if the Clinton campaign was maintaining the tenor that you were, I would be delighted to see this race go on and on and on. But the fact is that the Hill campaign is using some pretty damaging tactics to try and preserve her outside shot, including stating by clear and direct implication that Obama is an unacceptable commander in chief less fit than John "bomb iran" McCain, that he does not "love his country," that he is some kind of affirmative action case... in short, her campaign is running against him on the very same shotty, mindless themes Republicans will try to run against him. That's where I lose my enthusiasm for her. She's eating up tons of our cash and playing the repub themes...for what??? some outside 5% chance that she can be our weakest nominee ever? Despite the fact that they have very little policy daylight between them? That says something to me about her dedication to the party.
Hillary can of course stay in the race until the process (and most of our cash) runs out. But we need to be asking why? What is the good Democratic reason? I'll be voting D no matter who the nominee is, and I think anyone who doesn't is either a Republican or a jackass. But I just can't see how this is helping anyone but JSM and his neocon warmongers.
April 5, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can't turn back and undo what's happened to get us to this point, so I think Obama supporters need to lay back and wait for the last contest in June and the certain move by SDs in the same time frame that will put Obama over the 2024 delegates he needs for the nomination. HRC is not going to get the nomination. But the more we bitch about her staying in the race and blame her supporters the more we undermine Obama's chances for the fall.
But I should add the caveat that we have to trust that HRC won't unveil another Repub-like attack on Obama. I'm hopeful that the worst of HRC's kitchen sink strategy is over. I'll be ready to reevaluate my thinking should this contest descend further than the low road taken in March.
April 5, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
FACT: Now with dodging sniper fire, the tax dodging foundation(s), the phony compassion tears, made up health care story(s)...we now learn that one of the candidates is also a ‘sleep deprived’ and ‘misunderstood’ unapologetic serial liar.
QUESTION: Shouldn’t any governance be built NOT on ethnicity or gender, but...on truth, credibility and judgment...!?!?
April 5, 2008 9:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Clinton at least understands healthcare economics, an exceedingly complex subject, even if she has to issue simplistic blather to you fools in order to get your votes. And I see no evidence that Obama has an ability at all other than spoon-feeding silly white liberals and ignorant black people paublum that you're conditioned to mistake for substance. I actually am starting to like McCain. Two weeks ago when the markets were falling, Obama and clinton were both basically saying the sky was falling and the gummint was gonna have to do something dramatic to save the system. McCain calmly said things were work out, as they always have. And now the market is vindicating him.
April 6, 2008 6:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Proof once again that people do eventually show their true colors.
The "market is vindicating him" only because the "gummint" did do something, as in release hundreds of billions of dollars in funds and step up to guarantee against losses by the purchasers of Bear Stearns.
As for your "seeing no evidence that Obama has an ability at all" the fact that you can not see it does not mean it isn't there.
Oh, and the part about "silly white liberals and ignorant black people" is really beyond reprehensible. Ignorant and prejudiced is not a good way to go through life and, I hope, certainly not welcome here.
April 6, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't feed the trolls. Admirable effort, but that's what they want you to do.
April 6, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Milla's version of this story is: "My fellow Clintonites, it's time for McCain."
April 6, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's time for Obama --- until we find out what Obama is really like. As they say, we already know 90% of what there is to know about Hillary. We only know 50% of what there is to know about Obama, and that 50% includes all the good stuff.
As for Obama's "first step" which was to condemn Wright's offensive rhetoric, is there any evidence Obama ever did that before it came out and bit him in the posterior? Obama made a speech after it all hit the airwaves. Wright's offensive views were well known at the church for decades while Obama was an enthusiastic member. It was available on CD. Some of it was available in print. Wright's adherence to "liberation theology" was not only well known, it was the cornerstone of his church. No objection from Obama until he needed to save his political butt. Obama has dodged a bullet thus far, because his supporters support him, and his Democratic opponents aren't about to get into it with him on racial issues. But in the Fall campaign, the GOP swift boat groups will have a field day, and I do believe we all know that. In my opinion, those who believe that Hillary is less electable then Obama will soon see to their great surprise that the reverse is true. I do hope we don't go down that road.
April 6, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto:
How do you know what percentages about either candidate are known or not known. How did you measure what is not known. Do you have some magical powers that allows you alone to know everything that is not known, and measure the percentages.
You truly are exposing yourself for the desperate Right Wing Racist Arse Troll that you really are!
April 6, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will just remind you of something here - Kerry was argued to be more electable than Dean. So that worked out, huh?
Electability is the stupidest fucking argument for a candidate ever invented. It is totally based on speculation. No one on the planet knows who is more electable until someone is elected.
It's exactly like this: I have a lot for sale. I have had it appraised and it is worth $160,000.
No it isn't worth $160,000. It is worth exactly what a willing buyer will pay for it and not a penny more.
That's what electability is - an estimate, an idea, a guess. It is meaningless, it is SUBJECTIVE and IT IS HOW WE KEEP LOSING.
April 6, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment