Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Why are the Obama supporters so demented?
I have seen a lot of comments that if Obama loses PA, I will give him more money. This simply defies logic. Obama starts April with 5:1 money advantage. Money is the least thing he nees now. If he loses PA, a very likely thing, do you think he loses because he does not have enough money? If he had spent $100 MM, he would have won? Could it be as simple as his message just does not resonate with the working class people?
You seem to hold this as matter of truth - whoever raises more money from grassroots deserves to win the election. You have a sense of entitlement that since Obama gets more money from small donors, he must win! Many of Hillary's supporters might have thought Hillary was entitled to this nomination initially. Now she has fought her life out for it. That's ok, she is a big girl and she can do nothing but fight! At this stage, the Obama people have gained this sense of entitlement. By giving him more money, you are trying to convince that populace out there that "hey, Obama has raised so much money, he is good. You should vote for him". You know he does not need your money, but you want to give him anyway so he can simply collect as much money as possible. This, my friend, is called demented. By the way, you have already convinced yourselves that the math is such that there is no way Hillary can win with pledged delegates anyway. If that is the case, why add "icing" to your "cake" any way?
Your local charities are most likely seriously devoid of cash running a homeless shelf or a needle exchange program. If you donate your money to them, the money could certainly be put into much better use.
You will argue that an Obama win will change everything. the homeless will disappear. the economy will grow 10% per year. Dow will reach 36,000. And the republican party will disolve. oh, really?
as a matter of fact, the policy difference between Hillary and Obama is close to zero although Hillary has a much better healthcare plan. You are so supportive of Obama is that you have made an unexplanable emotional committment to Obama. And you simply hate Clinton! This, my friend, is what I called a "demented" attitude.
Comments (46)
Sane people support Obama.
April 21, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very few insane people have the mental capacity to think they are insane.
April 21, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, the irony is so, so rich.
April 21, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
ROFL
April 21, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You really don't know!
On my way to an appointment, when I come back If there are any less than twenty or thirty responses, I will be very surprised.
April 21, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um...can you point to where any Obama supporter said this tripe:
You will argue that an Obama win will change everything. the homeless will disappear. the economy will grow 10% per year. Dow will reach 36,000. And the republican party will disolve. oh, really?
Or is this yet another of your cutesy illogical "arguments" that have no basis in fact or reality?
And Obama supporters are demented. Riiiiight. By your tortured logic, then anyone giving the Clinton's money for their 3rd term are demented simply because they're so far behind in delegates and can only win the Democratic strongholds and places they've lived.
April 21, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking for myself, I have a sense of "entitlement" that since Obama has more delegates, he must win!
The donations are just to help end the race sooner.
April 21, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Bleed her dry and she'll finally back off.
April 21, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you really believe the power of your money. Unfortunately, money does not buy love. Obama has plenty of money to throw around but he is just not winning big states with a population with diversified background. He ends March with $41 MM with 10 contests left. How much money does he need to win those contests? Have you thought that money may not be deterministic at this stage for Obama? Maybe, just maybe, his message is not resonating with some people. Have you thought about that?
April 21, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has plenty to beat her for the nomination. Now he needs funds for the general eleaction. We are just looking for the next excuse to send him a few dollars. It is like sometning that one gets to buy again and again.
April 21, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're crazy, Genghis. You think that just because Obama has more pledged delegates, more popular votes, does better in the polls, raises more money, has more individual donors, has the support of more elected officials, has more committed and enthusiatic supporters, has the support of more congressmen, wins more independent voters than Clinton, and wins more Republican votes than Clinton, that all this means he "deserves" the nomination? You, sir, have an obscenely large sense of entitlement. You are deluded.
April 21, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Entitlement? Try another "E" word: Earned. Obama has earned the nomination by winning the most pledge delegates and the popular vote.
April 21, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The blood of Peruvian children. We drink it. That's why we're demented.
It's pretty much an open and shut case.
April 21, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or was I not supposed to talk about the Peruvian kids?
April 21, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shhhhh!
April 21, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like you live in Opposite World. Where the prejudiced, old fogey, "he's a muslim, right", and just-not-paying-attention crowd are the "sensible" ones.
Obama overwhelmingly wins the highly educated vote. He wins almost all newspaper endorsments as well. There's a reason the smart money is on Obama.
April 21, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
What BS. I am really, really sick of those who tell me, as an Obama supporter, what I am or what I believe. Likewise for Obama supporters generalizing about Clinton supporters.
Folks who find it necessary to lump folks into tidy little categories do so, I believe, to conserve space in the small minds.
April 21, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
In psychology and neuroscience fields, that's known as "chunking". ;)
(OK, yes, we all do it. Still, I liked your take on it.)
April 21, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's try this again.
Obama is going to be the nominee.
Clinton will not win the pledged delegates.
Today, Obama needs 210 to have a majority of all the pledged there will ever be.
Wednesday, even if Clinton wins 60 percent of Pennsylvania pledged, he'll only need 147.
May 6, even if Clinton wins 54% of the delegates from Guam, Indiana, and North Carolina, he'll only need 60. At that point, everyone will know he's going to lock up pledged on May 20.
When the pledged are settled, the supers will fall like dominos. They will not override the pledged.
She will be out by May 10.
It isn't about emotions. It is't about what I want to see. It's about counting delegates and winning the nomination.
April 21, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your math arguement is so silly. Let's assume Obama wins more than enough total delegates after PR vote. then it is disclosed he fathers a boy from a white woman. This is pure hypothetical point. But weird things have happened before. Gary Hart almost won 1984 nomination. You thought he was well vetted. Donna Rice turned up in 1988 to sink his chance. Ok, so now you know Obama will lose in GE if he is nominated, do you think he should still be the nominee? According to you, he has the math so he must, right?
April 21, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're countering the logic of math, calling it a "silly" argument, by noting that we might find out Obama fathered an illegitimate child? And you seriously find no "silliness" in that? Really?
April 21, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
And my dad was just asking me what I wanted for my birthday. Now I know!
April 21, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice strawman. And here I thought it's just Hillary who suggested the sky would open up, light would come down, and celestial choirs would sing upon Obama's nomination. Most of us Obama supporters just hope for a candidate to represent us and offer ordinary Americans a couple avenues to get a leg up.
April 21, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
de-ment-ed
Function: adjective
1. suffering from or exhibiting cognitive dementia.
2. having a usually progressive condition marked by deteriorated cognitive functioning often with emotional apathy.
3. suffering a condition wherein one post 6 anti-Obama screeds in a row, accompanied by a fleeting sense of superiority.
April 21, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not that Obama "must win," he simply is winning. He is winning based on the DNC rules that have been in effect for decades--the person with the most delegates win.
As for money, why the anger? Obama successfully organized his campaign around the rules (there's that pesky word again) and around laws governing political donations. Instead of relying on a few fat cats, he's built a campaign that tapped well over a million individuals to give a little here and there. Why the condemnation of this? This is something that all Democrats can learn from and it is a system to model after as our financing laws will probably not shift back towards the super rich in the near future.
I'm also seeing this: "Why give money to Obama when your local charities probably need the money?" line all over the web. Maybe local charities are where Sen. Clinton's donors have been giving their $25 or $50 or $100? You might not want to assume that someone who's given $25 to a campaign haven't given to a charity.
April 21, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Donations to charity -- that would be the intended guilt trip part of the post.
April 21, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, you're right. But it's irritating, nonetheless.
April 21, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can feel free to donate to whomever you want. it is simply stupid to think that the fact that Obama has more money should entitle him to this nomination. He has outspent Hillary consistently and he still has not closed the deal. You think money can buy love? No! No lies packaged with money can sell to working class people. They simply do buy into this whole thing of "yes, we can". They are simply asking "how"? "Show me the money"!
April 21, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you intentionally dense? Obama is NOT "Entitled" to the nomination because he has more money. HE IS WINNING--he already has the significant delegate lead and unless Sen. Clinton wins the remaining contests with 20+ margins, she cannot catch up or pass him on the delegates.
April 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are so smart. Let's assume Hillary wins the rest of contests by 5%, all of them and she trails Obama with regard to pledged delegates. Who do you think should be the nominee? I know you will say that's impossible. But weird things have happened before. Remember how the Heat defeated the Mavericks and how the Bosox came back from 3 down to beat the Yankees?
Grow up! For you to win, just try to keep winning. You are not entitled to win yet although math is currently in your favor.
April 21, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, I don't see her closing the deal, either. In fact, she's a whole helluva lot farther away from closing the deal than he is. Money or not. But I suppose now the whine is going to be that he had more money than she did? Oh please.
It was she who had more money than him way back in the beginning -- more big money donors, more name recognition, more insider backers. Obama built a different organization and went up against hers. Now, all these months later, she's practically tapped out her big money donors and he's still humming along with his organization of smaller donors. She's in debt and he isn't. He managed what he had better than she did. And all of this is somehow unfair? I don't think so. It's simply the facts about how his campaign managed to out-campaign her campaign. Whining won't change those facts or make them go away.
And tell me exactly what Hillary is packaging with the money she has? GOP fearmongering, like her latest ad? Appealing to fear rather than reason? Why does that make her a better candidate?
I'm wasting my time on this.
April 21, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, we think because Obama is winning he should get the nomination. The fact that Hillary has mismanaged her campaign into debt while Obama has had the greatest grassroots fundraising success of any presidential candidate in history is merely an interesting aside.
April 21, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't whine. Just win if you can!
April 21, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
i·ro·ny
–noun, plural -nies.
an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.
April 21, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It ain't over until the fat lady sings. No one is competing against McCain because he has the numbers already. Obama simply needs to win with numbers. If he can beat Hillary in PA, he could close the deal. Let's see with all the money you give him, if he can buy some brotherly love.
April 21, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, Aimey, since the policy difference is minimal--which I agree with--to support one candidate and hate another is demented, will you support Obama in the general? And are you saying you don't hate him?
April 21, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I will not support Obama because he does not have the experience to run this country, period. I trust my children's safety and well being more with McCain than Obama. That's a simple and straightforward answer.
Honestly, i may have mis-characterized Obama's position a bit. He has a big mouth and nothing more than that. He may have policy positions but they are just collected from different sources and posted on the website. He does not talk about them because he does not know much about them himself. Pay close attention to Obama's poll number from MA. Ask yourself why they have such a hard time with Obama's candidacy. They have a serious case of buyer's remorse. I certainly do not hope the whole nation goes through that!!!
April 21, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't that, by your own definition, demented? I mean, certainly voting to continue these disastrous economic policies, the war in Iraq, the war on science, the defunding of the federal government, stacking the supreme court with ideologues, continuing a foreign policy that alienates us from the world, a pro-business agenda that allows poison in the food, lead in toys, and harmful chemicals in baby bottles, not to mention abstinence-only education in this country and the world that will create greater global disease and poverty is going to be harmful to your children's world, right? Even if Obama is inexperienced, at least his goals are Democratic, similar to Hillary's and he will be working in concert with advisors.
April 21, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awwwwww Aimey May is just a sad little bunny who can't believe that with her superior support system and outrageous name recognition advantage...that Hillary Clinton actually has LOST this nomination.
But she has.
You can squeeze your eyes shut as tight as you can. You can stomp your foot and scream NO NO NO. You can chant over and over IT'S HILLARY'S TURN. And it is simply not going to happen.
Obama is the next Democraic nominee for President and the next President of The United States.
Hillary wouldn;t be fighting so hard if she didn't know he would win in November. She would simply bide her time and run in 2012. However, President Obama would never lose a primary in 2012.
YES WE CAN! YES WE DID! YES WE WILL!
Obama '08
April 21, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can shout your lung out. Obama, god forbidden if he is the nominee, will not win GE by losing Reagan Democrats. You can keep your pipe dream going but your hope and dream will crash as hard as you keep them high. don't say I have not warned you!
April 21, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, you're frustrated. I was too when Obama took a header in New Hampshire. And when he didn't win Ohio. It's not like we all haven't felt disappointed when our candidates didn't win and we put so much of ourselves into all this. But geez, dumping on everyone in here isn't going to make anything better. And from the looks of your posts, you're only feeling worse with each response.
April 21, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Demented...That's a new one. I'll have to add that to my list of disparaging titles that Obama supporters have been called.
It seems as though you are frustrated. Your post comes across as bitter. Oops...are we allowed to say that?
Who would of thought that a black man named Barack Obama would give the Clinton's a run for their money...or lack of money. It's very inspiring. Finally a fresh face. There is something seriously wrong with the last 20 years. Yes...20 years of Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Clinton again.
Having said that, Just because I am supporting Obama, doesn't mean I hate Clinton. We need a Democrat in the White House. I will be happy to vote for Clinton in the GE if it comes to that. (Which it won't) You know...Hypothetically.
Is it Obama you loathe or his supporters? Can I clear anything up for you to assure you that we aren't demented? Maybe passionate would be a better word in my opinion.
April 21, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, hasn't McCain made our children less safe already? The war in Iraq created more hatred, took away resources from finding Al-Qaeda, and has destroyed our army. And McCain is all for it. If there is another Al-Qaeda attack it will be on the heads of everyone who advocated for this war. And don't you think "experience" is a bit of a canard? First of all, McCain has more than Hillary, but you wouldn't vote for him over her (and neither should anyone else.) Secondly, Dick Cheney has tons of experience but he's been an utter disaster. And George W. has more experience than anyone, but you wouldn't vote for him. Isn't it ideas, policy, judgement, and leadership? You don't like Hillary for her experience, I imagine, but for other reasons. Otherwise you would have been for Dodd.
April 21, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh yeah.
How do you expect Shrilliary Clintjoke to get elected with a 60% negativity rating and with 57% of the voting public believing she is dishonest and can't be trusted.
Go ahead and ignore the numbers when they're not pretty. It doesn't make them any less true.
YES WE CAN! YES WE DID! YES WE WILL!
Obama 08
April 21, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not that Obama supporters have a sense of entitlement. It is just that we can do math and as such we can see that he has won the nomination. It would be nice if he won PA and put Sen Clinton out of our misery but if the votersa of PA do not do the job then it will be left to NC.
Sen Clinton is not fighting for the nomination. She is fighting for fighting's sake. Inorder to be fighting for the nomination one must have some hope of winning it. She does not.
April 21, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh...You're overlooking the fact that Senator Obama should not even be in this race right now...Senator Clinton, with her years of experience, a huge fund-raising machine, a former (and very popular) president-husband campaigning for her, the 'best campaign organization ever', AND bearing the Clinton name should have closed the deal after Super-Tuesday.
By all rights, Obama's money should have run out long ago just trying to keep up with Clinton!
That he hasn't 'closed the deal' is a minor detail with me. The big question is: why (regardless of what's in whose account) she hasn't yet closed the deal?
April 21, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment