Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hillary' so-called blue-collar strategy
Forty years ago, Richard Nixon gave us the "Southern Strategy" which consisted of going after the white bigot vote in the south. Now, we have Hillary Clinton adopting the same strategy. Go after the uneducated, low-skilled, homophomic, white bigots... that is her "base." The Democratic Party's failures from 1980s onward is a result of the party's failure to reject outright bigotry whether based on gender, race, or sexual orientation and it's failure to embrace progressives who find bigotry repulsive (think the Howard Dean vote in Florida). The only reason that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) became law in 1993 is because the Clintons pandered to the bigot vote and pursued the 50 percent plus 1 strategy. The Clintons seem to think there is an equivilency between being white trash (the Clintons) and being AA. Sorry, they are not equivalent.
What is now abundantly clear for HRC, is the realization that she needs to pander the bigot vote to get the nomination.... how Republican... sounds like RMN in 1968.













Comments (24)
She's disgusting.
May 11, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, in fact, she is assisting gay men to embrace their gayness.... her homophobia is breath-taking.
May 11, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
And she is repulsive. Any self-respecting woman would have sent Bill over the edge when they discovered Monica-gate. What is very clear is that Bill and Hillary are more about power than about the good the the country.
May 11, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was kinda surprised that so many gay and lesbians were pro-Hillary after DADT. Billary has always been about Billary. Other people are just a means to an end for them.
May 11, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, at this point it is counterproductive to attack Hillary supporters, since we Democrats need them to support Obama, and many of them will not find that easy.
Second, since your candidate surely won the nomination, you should be happy, not angry. Perhaps the upswing in anger on this site reflects the knowledge that Hillary is about to have a landslide victory on Tuesday. But I doubt any Obama supporters are seriously worried that she will win the nomination, so perhaps they could tone back the angry rhetoric.
Third, it is overly simplistic to refer to the bigot white vote. Give people some credit. Many people who have racial concerns about Obama were, or could have been Obama supporters. But several factors, particularly his association with Jeremiah Wright, have raised doubts as to who he really is. Remember, a lot of people started off neutral, or enthusiastic about all the Democratic candidates. If you can imagine that along the way many people came to view Hillary negatively or with suspicion, then you should be able to imagine that many also came to view Obama negatively or with suspicion. Obama himself acknowledged that Wright is a legitimate political issue. And many of those "bigots" also are concerned that Obama might not be able to beat McCain. Don't forget the last election.
Before you judge people and point fingers, please read this article from the Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/09/AR2008050901417.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
May 11, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your rampant trolling has led me to not read any articles or long rants you post. The fact you're now trying to play the rational unifier is pretty hilarious. You're scum just like the woman you back.
May 11, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto F, you are one of the biggest hypocrites to appear on this website. "Do not judge or point fingers" indeed. Come back when you start taking your own advice. Until them, I believe the acronym is STFU!
May 11, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not angry... I am jubilant that Obama has defeated HRC. I wrote my post because I understand that the Clintons and their ilk (think, DLC) are a life-threatening cancer on the Democratic Party. Obama's defeat of HRC is akin to the surgical removal of a cancerous tumor. However, the Party will require follow-up chemo and radiation therapy to prevent new tumors.
May 11, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
And as for Hillary's homophobia, I completely disagree. And please don't forget Donny McClurkin.
May 11, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nor Hillary on Ellen DeGeneres and a number of other ways Hillary's embraced her LGBT supporters.
May 11, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem goes beyond Hillary. Ever since the 2004 election the DLC has been frantic to recruit "NASCAR Dads", i.e., that same white bigot vote you've been talking about because they need another demographic to support their neocon foreign policy. They figured African Americans wouldn't notice. The last thing they expected was a candidate like Obama inadvertantly exposing the strategy. Basically, the DLC wanted to run against their own party, recruit Republicans and foist on Americans two political parties united in support of perpetual war with working class whites and African Americans for cannon fodder.
May 11, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
In 92, it was all about "soccer moms," then "NASCAR dads" in 04. Opus had a post yesterday where it's clear the focus in the remaining primary states is on "varmint taxidermist sibling/spouses."
May 11, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
backpack, you didn't backtrack through that old varmint trail for Langley protocol. Back-trailing a must, always.
May 11, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but things are a BIT hectic here, and I'm still solo.
May 11, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
got the protocol then, or should I re-track the varmint trail and cover it in leaves.
May 11, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sanitized for your protection. Thanks.
Burned all my notebooks. What good are notebooks?
They won't help me survive.
May 11, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Breathing is easy. Boredom is death.
May 11, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
bluebell: you are absolutely correct in your analysis
May 11, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have to admit that is a new one on me. Hillary is now is a homophobe?
May 11, 2008 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it might be instructive if you guys just started to yell about what she ISN'T rather than what she is. I am sure we can shorten this post list pretty quickly like that.
May 11, 2008 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
She isn't going to be president.
May 11, 2008 11:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thats a start. If we can work off of that then we can kill off at least 75% of posts on here. Keep going.
May 11, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh brother, what ridiculous non-sense. Clinton has been reasonably consistently progressive for her entire political life, and you hate her guts?
Ugh, what pathetic jerk-offs.
May 12, 2008 4:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
"You know, rich people, God bless us. We deserve all the opportunities to make sure our country and our blessings continue to the next generation."
Reasonable. Consistent. Progressive.
On whatever planet you call home.
Back here on Earth, well ...
May 12, 2008 7:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment