« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
If Hillary Supporters now support McCain, are they truly Hillary Supporters?
This question has been bugging me for a long while. It had pretty much dropped off my mind until today, when I read on the TPM front page about Debra Bartoshevich now supporting John McCain.
But were those that once supported Clinton and now support McCain truly Hillary Supporters to begin with? Or were they just supporting her because, well... She's Hillary Clinton, and a woman? Let me lay out my case.
Hillary Clinton said a lot of negative things about Barack Obama on the campaign trail in making her case that she was the better candidate. But the entire time, she made calls for party unity, no matter what happens.
After Obama clinched the nomination, Hillary conceded and endorsed him. But not only did she endorse him, she endorsed him as strongly as a person could, leaving absolutely no doubt that she supported Obama 100% and wanted to see him win in November.
Hillary later went on to ask her pledged delegates to vote for Obama at the convention, only bolstering her argument that she wants Obama elected in November.
Hillary Clinton's fundraisers are now ready to back Obama and the Democratic party.
All of this brings me to an inherent issue: if you truly supported Hillary Clinton, why wouldn't you continue to support her by supporting Obama? Isn't it inherent that supporting McCain goes against everything Hillary Clinton stood for, especially to those Clinton Supporters? Would these people have voted for McCain if, hypothetically, Hillary had never been a candidate?
I can't get these questions out of my head. I continue to think about what I would have done had Hillary won and Obama endorsed her. I would have thrown my support behind her (I know, easy for me to say, my candidate won, but it was a question I struggled with for months before concluding on, long before the primary was over).
I understand that maybe it truly is just out of spite that they support McCain over Obama, and it has nothing to do with sexism or racism, or whatever other reasons one might (even logically) make. But is that what Hillary would want?
After all, did she come out and give a spiteful speech about losing? Did she attack Obama for having won? Or did she, despite how truly hard it must have been, and how hurt she must have felt knowing she lost, throw her full, her absolute full support behind Obama? We know the answer is number three.
So why, of those out there who say they're going to vote McCain over Obama because she lost, can't they follow the example of the person they claimed to support above all, to the very end, and help Obama win the White House?
It just seems like such a lousy gift to give the person one pledged their full support to, to do the one thing that person would not want one to do. Honestly, it feels no different to me than if a child were to go against the wish of his or her dying parent. The sentiment feels the same, anyway.
Comments (24)
Once again - If Hillary supporters assert they will and do vote for McCain, when (except for gas tax holiday) Hillary's platform is the polar opposite of his, there is only ONE possible explanation. They were supporting HER because of GENDER - it sure wasn't because of her stance on policies and issues.
June 14, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is pretty much the sole conclusion I can come to. And I don't like coming to it, but what can one do in such a situation?
June 14, 2008 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
In this situation you highlight the facts. The only common denominator if they aren't truly endorsing her platform is they made their choice on her gender. Not the brightest bunch - Sometimes women give women a bad name. The ultimate irony, many yelling about how sexism harmed her candidacy and yet......
June 14, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
My sentiments exactly.
June 15, 2008 12:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, there is a different explanation - they weren't necessarily for Hillary, as against Obama. The current support for McCain among some former Hillary supporters (Billy Glad comes to mind) is consistent with this interpretation.
June 15, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, and thank you for emphasizing that this is only a trend among SOME (dare we even say, a vocal minority?) of Hillary supporters.
Especially if you look at the extremist sites like Hillaryis44, the point is anti-Obama far more than it is pro-Hillary. Hence, they aren't Hillary supporters at all. They just used the Hillary-supporter mask to define their true, anti-Obama stance.
And then, of course, there are the operation-chaos dittoheads PRETENDING to be Clinton supporters.
June 15, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is only SOME, and a very small minority in my opinion. I apologize if I didn't make that clear in my post.
But you get to the heart of my point: they claim to be Hillary supporters, but if they truly were, they wouldn't be so adamantly anti-Obama. Yes, they're more anti-Obama than they are pro-Hillary, and that's the issue. Claiming to be pro-Hillary and voting McCain doesn't work. Claiming to be anti-Obama and voting for McCain does (as much as it sickens me). But they don't claim to be anti-Obama. It's all about getting back at the party for disenfranchising them, and disenfranchising women in general.
Would African Americans have done the same had Obama not won? I find it hard to believe. They never seem to be quite as vindictive as entitled white women. And forgive me for making such a sweeping generalization.
June 15, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I don't recall any move by black voters to vote GOP after Jesse Jackson and Carol Moseley Braun lost the nomination. They, unlike the Hillary dead-enders, are not stupid. I hope they've left the Dem party for good.
June 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
ah, NO.
The question is - when these people were voting for Hillary Clinton and supporting her, were they voting for a woman or were they voting for the platform the same woman ran on?
June 15, 2008 2:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
And there ya have it....
June 15, 2008 3:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
...In a nutshell.
June 15, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
They were voting for the woman. Some may even have been voting against the black man. We'll never know.
ChronoSpark, in phrasing the question as you do there can only be one answer. However, if you expand the scope of the question to access the other layers that have played a part in this defection by some of Hillary's supporters, then what becomes obvious is pain, anger and outrage, all born of unacknowledged or acknowledged layers of sexism and racism.
Sexism did exist during this campaign. At the foundational level of any argumentative edifice regarding this behavior, we should just acknowledge it.
June 15, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yet it is the only rational way to form the question, as I see it. We're specifically talking about those who claim to support Clinton and then defect from her ideals to support John McCain.
And it's perfectly within one's ability to argue that despite voting for McCain, they are still Hillary Supporters. They make the claim, don't they? In fact, some have said that it makes even stronger supporters for defecting to McCain. I simply observe that such a claim makes no sense, as I see it, for the reasons I pointed out.
I welcome and accept a challenge to my question, but if there's no rational argument against it, then I'm left to conclude that the answer is certainly the most obvious one.
Also, I do acknowledge the anger and the hurt that goes along with it. But of the people I speak, my question is: is it so much anger, pain and anguish? As I stated, there's a certain spite to it that doesn't make sense coming from such loyal supporters as those in these instances claim to be.
My question then is, if they are such loyal supporters as they claim to be, then wouldn't their anger and hurt be trumped by that loyalty? For, is that not what Hillary Clinton herself did? As I stated, Clinton was probably quite hurt from losing, and having to concede. She was probably torn up inside. But if these supporters' role model, idol, and candidate, could find it within herself to forgive and to move on, I don't think it's too much to as that such supporters would do the same.
"When you hear people saying or think to yourself, 'If only, or, 'What if,' I say, please, don’t go there. Every moment wasted looking back keeps us from moving forward.
Life is too short, time is too precious, and the stakes are too high to dwell on what might have been. We have to work together for what still can be."
-Hillary Clinton
June 15, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
yes they are indeed hrc supporters and i think gender was just a cover for them....mccain is anything but a friend of "womanly issues"; therefore, to choose mccain over obama (who is almost identical to hrc on the issues minus a few nuances)is either vindictiveness or racism or both! hrc has been banking on such reactions...she created this problem, now let's see how she dispels of it...my guess is she will not b/c it avenges her loss in some twisted way...
June 15, 2008 3:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that it is a race thing. The ONLY thing that HRC and McSame have in common is RACE. Womanizing, anti-choice McSame has no other qualities that would endear him to liberal white women.
June 15, 2008 8:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I tend to agree with that. I think a lot of them are closet racists who need to find a scapegoat for why they refuse to vote for the black man. It's convenient when their candidate is a woman and cried sexism. It just validates them to vote for McCain not because Obama is black, but because Clinton is a woman who was given an unfair deal.
June 15, 2008 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARGH!
WENCH HILLARY IS ALL ABOUT WINNING!
OBAMA SUPPORTERS ARE ALL ABOUT SPINNING!
SHE NEVER LOST, SHE NEVER CONCEDED
SO SHE'LL BE THERE WHEN SHE IS NEEDED
HER CAMPAIGN IS JUST ONLY SUSPENDED
THAT'S WHY THE PARTY STILL HASN'T MENDED
BLUE COLLARS LOVE HER, WALL STREET COURTS HER!
SHE EVEN HAS ATHLETIC SUPPORTERS!
WENCH HILLARY CAN STILL BRING THE CORPORATE RAIDING 1990S! WATCH AND AND SEE!
ACQUIRE! MERGE! MARAUD! DILUTE! DILUTE!
ARGH!
June 15, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never get tired of your antics, Pirate_Peet. =)
June 15, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Simplest solution is usually the correct one. Many posters here and on hillaryis44 were interested in fomenting anti-Obama sentiment and disinformation as soon as he emerged as a formidable contender. They now suggest support for McCain and watching only FOX News Channel (indeed practically all the news items listed on HI44 come from the FOX web site) as the only remaining option. How is it so inconceivable that many or most of the most vitriolic contributors are -- and have always been -- aligned with the GOP? Who stands to benefit most from their activity?
June 15, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is probably one of the best points I've heard concerning this subject. Thank you.
June 15, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is how I see it too. They censor out any dissenting, or even reasonably questioning post. They are dedicated to disinformation, hatred and one purpose only - to stir up sentiment against Obama. They are Republicans and I dare them to prove otherwise.
June 15, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
ChronoSpark, in narrowing the question in such a leading way, you highlight the core. True. I have no quibble with that for it aims at something specific. I agree with you that an element of spite is involved. Probably a good bit of it, in fact. I'd even suspect that a dose of racism is involved.
The part of Hillary Clinton's platform she (the delegate in question) resonated to is the foreign policy in which Hillary Clinton and McCain shared some expressed similarities. That's the only part of Hillary's platform this delegate laid claim to in that interview, and she claimed the candidate's gender as another reason. She said "I'm kind of disenfranchised," and expressed anger at the party, disliking the way the RBC solved the situation. That's how I read that piece and the statements she uttered during her interview.
I think this particular woman and the small minority who have laid claim to this strategy should be jettisoned. Lets move on. They cannot be brought back because they may have never been Democrats. What is damaging is that though these are in the minority, their vituperative voices are privileged by our tv media. That incenses me.
However, there are others who voted for Hillary Clinton and who will now vote for Obama and who too are angry and outraged. Let's reach to them. Let's practice honesty with them and acknowledge that sexism was indeed a factor in some ways that Hillary was treated.
June 15, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those are my sentiments exactly (god I'm redundant). Thank you.
June 15, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Honestly, it feels no different to me than if a child were to go against the wish of his or her dying parent.
Please. I can't speak to how it feels to you but Clinton isn't dying and she isn't my parent and doesn't control my vote simply because I supported her. I supported her as the best candidate in the field since Feingold didn't run. That she endorsed Obama isn't surprising to me because she always said she would support the chosen nominee in spite of what the idiots were posting here non-stop throughout the campaign.
I'm not going to vote for McCain under any circumstances but because of the campaign Obama ran, I'm unable to vote for him as well.
June 15, 2008 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment