« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hillary supporters are grieving
An article on HuffPost says that Hillary supporters are grieving and asks Obama do do something to win their support.
Let's stipulate that some Hillary supporters who are women are grieving..
What are the 5 stages of grief, according to Kubler-Ross? Denial,
anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
For Clinton's original and later-coming supporters, the denial phase
began after it became clear that the delegate math simply did not
support a Clinton win after a certain point, without major tinkering
with the reality as presented. Anger emerged as primary during the last
phase of the campaign as denial began to give away and continued after
the last primary was run. It is still running strong among some but has
merged into bargaining, which is what I think is being expressed when
we hear talk of what Obama has to do to win their votes and allegiance.
The depression phase emerges in the dark view of the future: We will
not see her like again in my/our lifetimes; this was the opportunity,
now it is gone.
I hope and pray that the acceptance phase begins soon, both for those
with these awful feelings, and for the rest of us for whom an Obama
presidency presents a tremendous opportunity to begin the long,
frustrating, and difficult process of shifting the direction of our
nation with the involvement of the many, many people who have become
engaged in this effort.
Comments (22)
I've gone back to anger. It's much more enjoyable. Or what is it, "Vengeance is a dish best served cold"? Yes, enjoy your temporary superiority. Sleep well under silken sheets, lest you wake before dawn.
August 25, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whiner
August 25, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, Des,
The time stamps indicate that you submitted your "Okay, Fess Up And I'll Play Nice" post just 11 MINUTES after your comment here. Did I miss a bit of intended humor, or did you have an Obama epiphany during those, uh, 11 minutes?
August 25, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmmm. That piqued my curiosity.
What say you, Des?
August 25, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Des, I don't think this was intended to be a condescending post. I think it was sincere and meant with respect.
For what it's worth.
August 25, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correct. One day I'm going to have to figure out exactly which keys create those emoticons.
August 25, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jason, speaking as a fervent Obama supporter, you are truly an ass. And - since you seem to be so keen on Obama - you might want to check out what he says, and what he wrote, from time to time, rather than doing the whole project a disservice. you know, all that bit he wrote/spoke about reaching out, crossing lines, healing divisions, compromising IN ORDER to gain people's engagement, etc. etc. Because here we are, presented with the first truly tough case we have to overcome, and guys like you are running around the blogs, tossing kerosene (sorry, no gas left) on the flames. It just staggers me.
And it also shows NO appreciation of the need to build a political coalition. No sense that what you have to do is make some substantive, as well as symbolic and rhetorical, sacrifices. You show NO polling or strategic sense, nothing. Only way Obama wins is with 85%-90% of Democrats onside. right now, he's got 70%-75%. Wanna guess who the others are?
As a first step, I'd suggest you go to your room and grab a god-damn mirror, and think. Think hard. And when you come out, just shut the fuck up for a while, and let grown up people - ones with a clue as to how to handle this stuff - do their thing. Show you understand how it's done, and then you can play too.
Anyway, bet you felt clever writing this post, eh? Stages of grief. Spare me.
August 25, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, your abusive language makes me reluctant to carry on any discussion.
Clever. Okay, maybe too but not intended with ill will, believe it or not.
Enlighten me. What should we (Democrats who want to win the election) do to bridge this gap?
FYI, I was responding to an article by a fervent Clinton supporter on HuffPost who defined the Clinton supporter state as grief. Title is "What Do Hillary women want" written by a communications CEO and psychotherapist.
Link is: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcelrath-renna/what-do-hillary-women-wan_b_121190.html
August 25, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
A reference to the original Huffpo post might've helped put your post context. It looks like you're getting a hostile reception, and I'm not sure why that is.
August 25, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
jmundstuk & laura, I apologize for being so irritable today. It's not my usual style & it was unfair. What happened is I came back to TPM after a holiday, and was struck by how MANY posters & commenters just can't seem to restrain themselves from further insulting Clinton's disgruntled backers. Calling them "children" & talking about "Waaah, your feelings are hurt," and this piece - which on its merits, wasn't as bad - just sounded like more that really unhelpful emotional/psychological talk.
And the thing is, it's just REALLY bad politics. It WILL hand the election to McCain. This is straightforward politics - If Obama can get 90% of Democrats onside, we win. No matter what Rove or McCain does. It's our simplest path to victory. But there is just NO political evidence that our response, as Obama backers, of insulting or shouting at them is gonna work. I tried to lay out a bit of what MIGHT work, when bringing political constituencies onside, here. But right now, it's as though we've absorbed the fear & the polarization & the PERSONALIZATION that the Republicans have brought into politics so heavily. And psychology talk - often directed in a hostile manner - does NOT constitute an effective POLITICAL way to bring them onboard.
I'll shut up now, other than to apologize for being over-the-top hostile, and to quote from this afternoon's NYT quotes, "Obama conceded that some political patchwork was needed – and the burden was on him. He said, “There are going to be some of Senator Clinton’s supporters who we’re going to have to work hard to persuade to come on board – that’s not surprising."
He knows this - but many of Obama's own followers don't. It's OUR work, the winners, to bring THEM onboard. And we haven't done enough yet.
August 25, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I totally understand. I've tuned out from political chatter over the last few weeks, and I was a little shocked that folks seem to be picking at the Clinton-Obama feud scab -- but then I quickly decided this was mostly stirred up and over-blown by the punditry in order to make the Democratic Convention more exciting. Sigh. It's depressing to see so many intelligent people taking the bait, too.
Nonetheless, I do think the Obama campaign will use the convention (as well as take some additional steps) to ensure that Clinton's supporters are enthusiastic about the Democratic Party's ticket.
When I try to employ some empathy with Hillary's supporters, I imagine how terribly disappointed they might feel, and also how resentful they might be if they felt their support for the Democratic ticket were considered "automatic" and could be taken for granted. Ouch! It certainly would make me feel pissed off. I might not go so far as to vote for McCain out of spite, but I definitely could see how I might feel resentful, unappreciated, then depressed, and then apathetic. And then I might not bother to vote at all.
That's something we can't afford! So Hillary's supporters need to know that we don't take their votes for granted, we don't take Hillary Clinton for granted, and we know that we need their enthusiasm to be successful in November.
What's so hard about that? Nothing. So let's make sure we articulate that.
August 25, 2008 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, quinn! This is uncharacteristically hostile, coming from you. What's up? Is there a backstory of growing animosity between you and jmundstuk that I'm not aware of? (I realize that's none of my business -- I'm just genuinely taken aback by your anger.)
August 25, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good question, laurajordan. First contact with quinn. Thanks for your comments; I guess post was seen as condescending; maybe it was a little, playing off the psychotherapist part of the author of the article. I do think that the Kubler Ross way of looking at loss does help understand reactions. It certainly helps me understand the reaction of Kennedy and McCarthy supporters in 1968 after the death of RFK.
But quinn, what should we do here to bring Hillary's supporters to enthusiastic support?
August 25, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
jmundstuk.... please see apology & link above. As for further ways forward, the most obvious one (VP) - for various reasons - wasn't taken. The next most obvious is to do something both substantive AND symbolic. Adopting HRC's health care proposal might perhaps be one way - because while there are differences, I suspect nobody believes they are that large, nor that the proposals as they stand won't be amended repeatedly on their way through
Congress. I suspect Hillary's own backers can suggest other ways. And I'm HOPING Obama & his team have some ideas for the Convention.
August 25, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I never really expected Obama to select Senator Clinton for the Veep post, but I do fully expect him to ask her to serve on his cabinet in some capacity. He's not too proud to admit he needs both her political influence and her smarts to get an agenda and policy rolling, and she would be an asset in a great many areas.
Do you feel an announcement that Sen. Clinton will be taking a cabinet post would help energize her supporters?
August 25, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I think that Clinton as majority leader in the Senate makes more sense than a cabinet post, although that would be fine with me, too. She is really ideally suited to strengthen health care, for instance, and to do the hard political work of building legislative achievement, a talent which she has demonstrated in her years in the Senate. I think she'd make a fine Speaker of the House as well (you don't have to be a member! True!), but that is of course fantasy.
August 25, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
The number of democratic Clinton supporters who ultimately will not vote for Clinton is very, very few.
I know what the polling says, but let's remember that there were many non-democrats who voted for Clinton, for a variety of reasons, some sincere and some, who have never intended to vote for a democrat in the GE, for very cynical reasons.
Let's also remember that with the vast increase in publication space afforded by the increased internet publishing enables almost anybody to play the pundit.
August 25, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Grieving! Maybe that Kennedy film tonight will remind the Clinton cult about what it means for political supporters to be grieving.
August 25, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your comments, quinn; accepted. I feel much better with that and my anti-anxiety medication. Must say I've never been flamed like that!
August 25, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, thank you for being gracious, jmundstuk. Much more than I've been at times these past days. Maybe you could lend me some of that medicine?
August 25, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
If all of this is leading toward a true blending of forces, I'll say a big amen. We need all the committed Hillary voters -- female Hillary voters who have fought the fight for women's rights and who yearn for a female president -- that we can get to defeat the Republicans and Mr. McCain, who never saw a war he didn't like.
August 25, 2008 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Clinton supporter who really does want party unity and to win this election, you have just got to stop assuming that Clinton's supporters are all women. That is so insulting.
Clinton did poll slightly better than Obama among women, but not much. Women split their vote and it's so damn sexist to go on and on as though the reason people supported Clinton was purely gender based.
I supported Clinton based on her health care plan, her economic plan and my discomfort with Obama's religiosity and social conservatism. I get pissed every single time I see this assumption manifested.
And of course, you ignore the many working class Clinton supporters who preferred her because of her economic policies. Why do you infantilize Clinton supporters in this way? Just stop it and if you can't stop it, be quiet.
August 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment