Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So Why Did This Long-Time Critic of Bill Clinton Support Hillary for VP? Why?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:35 PM
Original message
So Why Did This Long-Time Critic of Bill Clinton Support Hillary for VP? Why?
I supported Hillary Clinton to be Barack Obama's VP running mate. Openly. Without reservation. My private e-mail address at hotmail was filled with "how could you?" "why would you?" and more for the past month. My answer was always this: party unity and helping Obama, my candidate, win the White House in November --not with just popular votes which he will have, but with those precious electoral votes--- where he starts out with only John Kerry's electoral base and must expand or suffer defeat. No electoral college victory, no White House for Obama and Michelle.

For the record, I was anti-Clinton before it ever became "cool" to be so. I fought the Clintons in 1992 with Jerry Brown clear up to the convention in Madison Square Garden where we gave them hell at every caucus and during the platform writing. Jerry asked me to be his advance man on the day that he gave his "no endorsement" press conference there at the Mid-Town Hyatt, now a Trump property. One night at the elevator in our hotel, I told the man who'd been my hero since I was 16, Tom Hayden, that I'd always admired how he'd never compromised all those years. Tom looked at me, obviously touched, and asked me, "But David, I ask you. If I vote for Bill Clinton, am I compromising?"

I'd worked with the SDS to help organize the moratorium against the war in 1969 when I was 16 at my Texas college campus where I was threatened to be expelled. Later, I'd worked with Tom and Jane's Citizens for Economic Democracy grass roots here in Los Angeles and Santa Monica in the 1970's, volunteering at the LA Free Clinic, the Gay Community Service Center in its infant days, marching in gay rights "parades" before they were fashionable and when we had rocks and beer bottles thrown at us and our tires slit.

As a homosexual socialist, I understand fully about taking things incrementally in life. Politics is the art of the possible. And as Mick sang, "You can't always get what you want." No one need lecture me or any member of a despised minority group about that. Our expectations are very realistic.

My support for Hillary was dynamic in that it had many, not just one, reasons:

1.) Party Unity: Overarching everything, I know the party needs to be unified. My candidate did not sweep the primaries as Kerry had done just 4 years ago. Like it or not, Hillary wound up with roughly the same number of popular votes and delegates as Barack did. Argue that until your face turns blue, but it is the truth. And she will have nearly half of the delegates in Denver next week. Delegates are not the average Jane and John on the street. They are loyal. They are very loyal. Moreover, Hillary won the great majority of the last ten primaries. People here at the DU and other liberal blogs who continue to shout out and demean her supporters...long after the primaries are over not only lack grace, but are morons who are insulting the very people you must have to see Barack defeat John McCain. As an Obama supporter, I was content enough in June that we had won. And, yet the continued and juvenile harassment of her supporters here had become a sick spectacle to witness. Many of you should be ashamed of yourselves. And with every Hillary supporter that quietly walks away, we lose another vote and soldier.

2.) Hillary is not Bill Clinton: Whether they are married or not, Hillary is not Bill. And Bill is not Hillary. And her career and life is not something to ridicule. Her speaking out in China to the entire world in the 1990's about the unacceptable treatment and condition of little girls and women on our planet was a cosmic crack in the collective psyches of the human race. She did try, when no one else ever had, to bring universal health-care to every single American and the corporations took her down. She sucked it in when her husband cheated on her, she sucked it in when he acted like a fool during her campaign. And yet, there is a great dignity in this woman, a great resolve within her that I like. She is a great woman.

Frankly, I don't see how Joe Biden helps Barack Obama win in November. He may help in Pennsylvania, but we always carry that state anyway. That's part of the Kerry base. How do we win back Ohio, West Virginia, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana and the states that Bill Clinton won and where Hillary did so well in the primaries. Joe Biden? He's going to help Obama there? I want to believe it, but I don't. I hope I am wrong.

Finally, I don't know the inner workings of what all went on between Barack and Hillary. If Barack had no intention of picking her, he should have told her weeks ago and said so publicly or given her a chance to say publicly that she wasn't interested. Rather, this thing dragged out and while Hillary was living out of a suitcase traveling around the country stumping for Barack, the impression was given that she still may be his pick. My sister, who is a life-long Democrat, a yellow dog Democrat, left a message on my phone, "I'm really mad at your Obama, David!". Well, at least she said it. I won't call her back and tell her how "stupid" she is or how "Republican" she is. I'm glad that she expressed her feelings to me. Believe me, there are millions just like my sister who aren't saying a word today.

Mr. Axelrod, "That ain't no way to treat a lady, a lady, no way to treat a lady, a woman, a friend."

Here's hoping that Obama's delegates in Denver will have more grace than many here at the DU have in how they treat Hillary's supporters.

When elections are determined on "getting out the base", it is important that the base be motivated and enthusiastic in turning out.

To the Obama supporters here who have been gracious to their fellow Hillary supporters, I stand with you proudly.

To the Obama supporters who have and still continue to ridicule Hillary's supporters, I distance myself from you proudly.

And to everyone who is still smacking their lips at Hillary and her supporters being vanquished, you'd better get out your prayer rugs that John McCain doesn't pick a woman as his VP.

The issue at hand is defeating John McCain. Stomping out the ember of a defeated primary opponent may still make you feel good, but does nothing to win in November.

I will take a respite from the DU for the next week. I will be back. Skinner has created a great forum here where open thought has a long tradition. I hope when I return that the Hillary-haters will have filled their appetite and possibly, just possibly have understood that the sum is always greater when you add, then when you subtract.

Obama/Biden '08.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. A) You don't know that he DIDN'T tell her weeks ago and B).....


Glad that you are on board.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beregond2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, please.
McCain could choose Gloria Steinem, and it would make no difference. No woman who understands anything would for or against a candidate because of their sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. All that counts, the only God Damned thing that counts...
Is winning.

Especially now that the choice is official, discussing the past in now neither useful nor productive, all that counts is winning.

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Winning is why a unity ticket was important. I hope we'll win anyway, but we have less chance with
Biden. I'm saying that, even though I like Biden, because of what the polls say.

As I've said elsewhere, if Obama couldn't bring himself to give the Democratic Party the unity ticket the majority of Democrats wanted, Biden's the best choice among the other possible running mates, the ones mentioned most often.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. At what point do you quit belly-aching over this?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LowerManhattanite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
38. Two words...
“Ne” and “ver!” :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
41. NEV-
ER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
65. Bill? you are getting good at the internets...
i like how you say, you hope he will win, but he's always making decisions that will make it harder for him to win.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baltoman991 Donating Member (869 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #5
70. So
On another thread here someone points out to you that Biden was indeed the best choice. A link was provided and everything. Your reply was you don't believe the analysis.

Why? Why don't you believe anything that proves that your analysis is wrong?

Every day, all day you're posting this same argument. Hillary is not going to be the pick. It's over. How about just posting that you're going to vote for this ticket and leave the rest of the speculation off as to if she would have been a better pick or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. We may well be able to learn lessons from the past, and that knowledge might help us to
win the November election. So I disagree with you. While winning is indeed all that counts, IMO discussing the past can be "useful and productive," and I hope that it continues here at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
75. This sort of weird Orwellian thinking freaks me out on this board.
"Pretend the past didn't happen" type of statements.

The hive mentality is foreign to me, I like to think for myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azmouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm sorry that you don't feel the excitement for Biden that most of us do.
Edited on Sat Aug-23-08 01:43 PM by azmouse
He brings plenty to the ticket.
I look forward to a brighter future with Dems in the Oval Office for many years to come and a country that we can be very proud of!

If HRC people would vote for McCain if he choses a woman then they were more about a female in the WH then they were a Dem anyway and don't really care about the facts... McCain would be disastrous for females everywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. Yup. It's all about you. buh-bye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
34. Always and forever!
Every day, the same tired spiel from the same guy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
8. I really do hope this is the last day we go through this exercise.
For the record, I am one of the people who does not agree with Clinton supporters that she would have been the most helpful to the ticket. I happen to believe she'd be a drag on the ticket, frankly.

I base this on Ohio, alone. Yes, Clinton won Ohio by sweeping the heavily Democratic congressional districts (and she picked up a point or two from the Operation Chaos voters). But Obama crushed her in more GOP-leaning districts, like Cincinnati, where he won with 72% of the vote, and had one helluva organization and enthusiasm on the ground. I don't see Obama having any trouble picking up the traditionally Democratic counties in Ohio in November, the same counties Dem nominees always carry.

What he needs to do is win southwestern Ohio, and the presidency is his. And Clinton is so profoundly unpopular down here, that I think she actually could've blown it for him, and certainly could've increased GOP turnout.

That being said, I don't think the VP spot was ever a good fit for her. I like her in the Senate, and I like her in eight years, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Word.
Woof....I'm thowing up hairballs and I'm not even a freakin' cat...

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. Another Ohioan who feels seconds that emotion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
32. wise words
Unlikely to be heard by the OP. He's a broken record, repeating the same spiel daily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
42. Thanks for that report on O-hi-o Jen..
I know you and everyone worked so hard there in the Primaries and look how FAR we've come! :patriot: :bounce: :party: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
11. You seem to think that anyone actually cares.
News flash: we don't, really.

And I'd really like to know in what way Hillary Clinton would have helped Obama. Would you care to elaborate on that, please? She has no actual, credible foreign or domestic policy experience, has sponsored no significant legislation, is not a good or effective speaker, is widely disliked and distrusted by a fair percentage of the electorate, and her husband's financial closet has so many skeletons that it rivals the Museum of Natural History. Given all of the many negatives she would bring, how would she possibly have been the best, or even a GOOD, choice for VP?

(NB: Legitimate criticism is not hatred.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RTBerry Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Seconded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beausoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. I care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Yes, but you seem to think having a vagina trumps all other considerations.
You actually intimated you'd vote for McCain should he select a female running mate. So forgive me if I don't put much stock in your opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
36. the deadenders care!
they care a lot!

There's a dozen of them that care!

Well, a few more if we count their sock puppets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
13. Bill WON states like Ohio, Arkansas and Florida, and his stewardship of Dem party LOST THOSE STATES
for Democrats before he left office. Why doesn't the fact that Bill ran the DNC to serve only his needs and let party infrastructure state by state collapse long before 2000, not get hung around his neck?

I'm sick of people saying what states Clinton won in 92 and 96 when he is the main Dem responsible for LOSING those states as the RNC machine was allowed to gain control of those states UNCOUNTERED by the handpicked Clinton loyalists in charge of the party leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
33. I lived in Ohio during that time period
and the fault belongs to Ohio Democrats who let their organization die on the vine and nominated bad candidates for statewide office. Not everything is the fault of the Clenis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #33
48. Ohio Democrats had NO national party supporting them. They were another state left to collapse
Edited on Sat Aug-23-08 05:14 PM by blm
with no guidance or muscle because the Clintons no longer felt a need for it by the late 90s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #48
58. we coud have had Jesus himself helping us
and we still would have fallen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
43. So many are just interested in sound bites like
the first 8 words of your sentence and not really thinking beyond that.

THis is all really good news for our party and I for one have to pinch my self..ouch!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
14. How do you know that Hillary wasn't told weeks ago?
And she knows she was not vetted. Come on! Hillary is smarter than that--give her some credit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beausoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
15. Nominated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #15
64. ...and right on cue.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
16. Hi David. I'm absolutely certain that the Obama campaign
treated Hillary with respect. They treat everyone with respect. Obama himself has bent over backwards to celebrate Hillary at the convention. And that is something that I wholeheartedly support.

Our party has always been the party that is willing to include everyone, no matter what their gender is, no matter what their race is, no matter what their sexual orientation is. Because what matters to us is people. All people.

Senator Clinton is a powerhouse and she deserves to be in a position where she can fulfill her dreams and the dreams of millions of women, myself included. She has great things ahead of her and she will forge her own path, bravely and with dignity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RTBerry Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
18. IMHO the Clintons' upcoming high-profile convention participation shows they've been in the loop.
I trust this will become evident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
20. As always, we Democrats thank you for your concern.
Edited on Sat Aug-23-08 02:45 PM by dicksteele
nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. David is a Democrat
And he raises valid points that merit consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
56. Your opinion of his "points" differs greatly from mine. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
22. Why are we still at "Hillary Supporters" vs. the rest of us?
The time for that has long passed. After June 2008, there should only be Democrats in this house -- period.

This eternal whining of "Hillary Supporters" gives her candidacy a bad name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. because he loves to stir up drama
And that's more important to him than seeing such distinctions ended.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #22
35. He voted for Obama and repeatedly posted for him
the fact you don't know that speaks volumes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Shiver me timbers! nt
Edited on Sat Aug-23-08 04:05 PM by quiet.american
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #22
44. A-
Men!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
publicatlarge Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #22
69. You do realize that 'whining' is
- a right-wing framing construction?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #69
77. All the more reason for it to have long ago ceased. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
24. K&R
SDS in 1969? We seem to have more in common than what I thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
26. Well at least you don't have to write these posts anymore
To be honest I wasn't sure what to make of them. I wondered if you had just been a major prick to Clinton supporters during the primaries and were doing a major suck-up job with so many of those OPs that were pretty much the same.

At least there won't be anymore, thankfully. Enjoy your week away.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
28. Take care, my friend.
I guess the change wagon lost a wheel. I have nothing against Biden, but change he ain't. What was one of the objections I read here ad nauseum about not choosing Hillary? Oh yeah, that she voted for the IWR and that she was part of the Washington establishment and didn't represent "change". And who did we end up as VP nominee? Someone who has been in office longer than McCain, who's almost his age and who also voted for the IWR.

Hillary was never vetted, they didn't even bother to go through the motions and they didn't even consult her or Bill (as they did others like Chuck Schumer) over the VP pick. Also, texting supporters at 3:00 AM was beyond cutesy.

I don't blame you for taking a break.

Here's hoping to see you soon.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chloroplast Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #28
39. You may not understand this but you say things that REALLY get people riled up.
NO ONE owes the Clintons a damn thing. Obama doesn't need to run his VP choice by Bill or Hillary (you've got to be joking) if they aren't on his trusted list. Hillary is also a junior Senator representing her state and that's her job. Not vetting VP choices, not giving advice to fellow Senators but acting on behalf of her constituents. And, I thought the 3 AM text was funny and adequate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #39
51. He may not owe Hillary anything but
she did receive a lot of support during the primaries. She knows her supporters and could have provided some useful insights to Obama's VP selection team. If Obama chose not to include Clinton in the decision, I guess that's his choice as the nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #28
49. I agree about the 3am thing
Sending the text at 3am seemed like a jab at Clinton, whether or not Obama intended it to be. This doesn't scream unity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KAZ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #28
54. That's not constructive criticism. Just blasting the ticket.
Hopefully, somebody will do the needful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A-Schwarzenegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
29. That's the most beautiful story I ever heard.
Or at least one of them. :*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
30. ... his truth is marching ONNNNNNNN!
Thanks for the drama.

A simple "I'm sorry for being so annoying about something I was obviously dead wrong about" would have worked better than yet another long, poorly constructed, rambling, egocentric statement of purpose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sancho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
40. Kudos for being objective! Kicked...
I also did not have Hillary as the first choice originally, and we all know the traditional baggage that she would bring. On the other hand, Hillary has a proven base that extends into the independent and GOP voters and would resonate with women.

Joe Biden is a safe choice; no better than Richardson at foreign policy and not likely to carry the Hispanic, western, or southern votes. Biden has been known to speak out and cause problems - a little risky.

I don't see that Biden hurts anything, but he also doesn't help. Biden would NOT be a candidate to follow a successful Obama Presidency.

The only leading "change" possibility who would really shake up things would be Gore or Kusinage.

Overall, I think it was an average choice, not a great one.


:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RollWithIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
45. Hillary Clinton supports the Biden VP pick... why don't you???
"In naming my colleague and friend Senator Joe Biden to be the Vice Presidential nominee, Senator Obama has continued in the best traditions for the Vice Presidency by selecting an exceptionally strong, experienced leader and devoted public servant. Senator Biden will be a purposeful and dynamic Vice President who will help Senator Obama both win the Presidency and govern this great country."

Senator Hillary Clinton on August 23rd 2008
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
46. "the sum is always greater when you add, then when you subtract"
Unless, of course, you're subtracting negatives.

:evilgrin:

But really, the dichotomy of these perceptions of HRC is strange. On one hand, this is supposed to be the woman who was ready on day one to lead this country, and is perceived to be such a fighter and attack dog, yet the vision that some of her supporters want to hold onto is this poor, brave, helpful woman clinging to a hope that she might be asked onto the Democratic ticket only to have those hopes cruelly dashed by that mean, insensitive Obama machine.

As a woman, I'd be embarrassed to think of her that way. Does that help people hold onto the anger a little longer than remembering that this thing was, by pretty much any account and per the media pre-primary hype, hers to lose, and lose she did?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
47. If she needs to have a VP slot dangled in front of her to get her to campaign
for the Democrats this year, then she ain't worth shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
50. Why is it always the "Hillary-Haters" who have to change their tune?
Maybe its time for the Hillary supporters to sack up, stop salting the earth, and get on board with the party's ticket. If they can't do that, then its time for them to either sit this one out or move on to McCain if they think that he will represent their interests better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barack the house Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
52. Barack has shown himself a leader he had to do what he wanted --->
This was his first prsiedential move. The location argument is a falicy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barack the house Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
53. Sorry but this post sounds like a panic attack be calm work for the ticket fear invites misfortune->
Nothing to fear but smear itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
55. HUGE K&R!!
Let The Truth Be Heard! Bless you. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
57. You fail to recognize Obama's strong point: Picking the right people for the job.
You list YOUR reasons that you think HRC shoulda been VP. YOUR reasons. (That she's not Bill Clinton is not really a reason to be VP, of course.)

BUT...
1. Obama won the primary.

2. Part of the reason (maybe the major reason) he won is because his campaign was much better run than HRC's (both the strategy and the money handling).

3. Obama selected the people who ran his campaign, and he regularly made the executive decisions to facilitate the campaign. There was little in-fighting, as a result.

4. Obama, it is obvious, selected his campaign people more wisely than Clinton and others, despite their "having more experience." HRC, it is reported, also failed to make executive decisions to quell the in-fighting among her campaign workers.

5. Now Obama has selected a VP. There is NO reason to think that he will have selected this person more sloppily or more unwisely than he selected his campaign workers.

6. The goal is to win. NOT to make any one person feel good or save face. If Obama continues his winning streak of picking the right people for the job, then he has selected the right VP, and no one can really argue with that.

There simply is no one else who has ever run a campaign better than Obama did. Therefore, there is really no one who can say that THEIR choice for VP (or other campaign decisions) is better. No one else has proven it, really. Esp. those in the HRC campaign. She had it all...momentum, money, name recognition, Dem. Party leaders' support, voter support....and she lost it all.

It's not really personal. It's all about winning. If Obama thought that HRC could bring it home, he would've chosen her. But he thinks Biden, apparently, can do the job better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-08 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
59. imo it was clear from the get-go that Hillary wasn't being considered for veep...
Her behavior toward Obama in the primaries, the lack of respect once he'd won, and her campaign trying to bully him into choosing her that first week or two made it IMPOSSIBLE for him to choose her. Barack has to be able to trust his veep ~ some of her supporters have had a huge blind spot about this.

That said, Biden is the perfect choice given the current situation ~ I'm so glad you support the ticket, and I was happy to see Gov. Rendell and D. Wasserman Schultz being so supportive today!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hatchling Donating Member (968 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-08 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
60. As a Hillary supporter who once had you on ignore...
for what I percieved as your vicious support of Obama, I didn't really think Obama would pick Hillary. I didn't really think she would be he best pick.

However, your passionate posts on the topic helped heal my heart. To see someone from "the other side" support her wholeheartedly was awesome. It was fun to imagine (especially the thought of some heads here exploding if she were his choice!) Thank you.

But choosing her would have continued the divide, IMO. Feelings were too high on both sides. Anti-Hillarites would have exploded (hee-hee) and Pro-Hillary people like myself might not be able to resist pouring salt in their wounds. (neener-neener!) NOT a way to heal hearts and the divide ( which I think is greatly a GOP meme).

During the debates there was always one thing you could count on hearing from most of the candidates: "Joe is right." ( In fact that would be an awesome ad: clips of all the other candidataes as they said "Joe is right.")

Joe is not only the safe pick, he is the right pick, he is the strongest pick. I can get behind Joe. I was already behind Obama due to Hilary's support of him. Joe as VP candidate actually excites me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes3000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #60
63. As an Obama supporter who was intrigued with Hillary as VP, thanks for the post.
Very interesting insights.

I thought HRC as VP would heal things but perhaps you're right. Anyway, thanks for giving me another perspective to consider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
61. My issue is this:
It should have been automatic.



Obama won, Clinton lost, in a fair contest. In fact, it was biased towards Clinton because of the problems with Michigan and Florida on Super Tuesday. There is no way in hell those two elections can even be considered remotely fairly campaigned, fairly voted, or representative of the electorate. Obama and Edwards not on the ballot in Michigan, and a write-in gets disqualified? NO campaigning in Florida, going on name recognition only? Please.

But aside from that, they are both Democrats have very similar positions on virtually all issues. The loyalty of Clinton supporters to support and vote the Democratic ticket in November should have been automatic. Not only should there have been no debate, but the idea of even needing to consider having a debate in the first place should never even have surfaced!

"Okay, it's Obama on the ballot" should have been enough!





But somehow it wasn't. Somehow all of a sudden we were "divided" and needed "healing" or else dissatisfied Clinton supporters will vote McCain! At least, that what the MSM was more than happy to tell millions of people dozens of times a day. And what's this I hear about a pro-Clinton march and rally in Denver during the convention?

Can you imagine John McCain having a "unity" march and rally around the Washington Monument on January 20th?




From the amount we're being told we're "divided" by the MSM, you'd think that one candidate was Zell Miller and the other was Bernie Sanders.


I don't have any answers, though. Democrats haven't been able to come to terms with people such as Southerners that repeatedly and proudly vote Republican even as Republicans raise their taxes, cut their benefits, slash school funding, let public infrastructure collapse, and sent their jobs to China. And I don't see how those dissatisfied Clinton supporters can be brought around.

Nobody should have to say "If Obama loses, McCain wins. The Supreme Court will turn hard right for two generations. Women will lose control over their bodies. The rich will completely dominate the country's politics and economy. The middle class will be pushed into the working class and working poor class. The lower courts will continue to be stacked with neocons. Thouands of more Americans will die in the deserts and mountains of the Middle East. Renewable energy will not be furthered. Global warming will not be addressed. Corruption and cronyism will continue unchecked."

It should be obvious. But apparantly it needs to be said. So it is said. And still you have people willing to cut off their nose to spite their face over perceived slights.





Clinton should not have been the VP. There was no major idealogical rift to heel in the party as both Clinton and Obama are functionally very similar, but instead one driven by supporters being far to9 invested emotionally in their candidate. Clinton supporters would most likely be endless in their critisism of how Obama is using Clinton in his administration and spend the next four to eight years fussing over it and being loud, obnoxoious, and public about their feelings.

And for every Clinton die-hard that is won over because Hillary is the VP, I feel there would be two, three, or even four dispirited, apathetic, depressed Republicans that were either a) not going to vote, b) not going to vote for a president, c) going to vote 3rd party, or d) going to vote for Obama, that would be suddenly energized against the Obama/Clinton ticket. Whipped into a frenzy by Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, and others, they would get imbedded in their partisan heads that this is another chance to get the Clintons and keep them out of office! And millions would be energized to do just that. And that is bad both for presidential democrats and "down-ticket" dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
highplainsdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #61
66. Krispos, I've seen entirely too many Obama supporters here announce, during the primaries,
Edited on Mon Aug-25-08 01:41 AM by highplainsdem
that they'd never vote for Clinton -- or say, since the primaries, that they woudn't even vote for Obama, for chrissake, if Clinton were on the ticket -- to believe that the problem is on only one side.

Yes, we do need healing.

Yes, we do need unity.

And THAT is why so many former Clinton supporters were in favor of a unity ticket.

And it should NOT have been necessary to explain that here.

The polls were all showing that a majority of Democrats wanted Clinton on the ticket.

The polls were also showing Obama splitting the independent vote with McCain, the one candidate the GOP could have fielded with the most appeal to independents.

All along the basic political equation has been one involving how much an Obama/Clinton (or Clinton/Obama) ticket helps Dems, versus a ticket with one of them at the top of the ticket versus McCain plus God only knows on the other side.

And there is simply no way to figure that one out.

We have absolutely no way at this point to know how well Obama plus Biden will do against McCain plus a running mate he hasn't yet chosen.

But we DO know that with Clinton on the ticket, our party is more united.

The polls showed that.

The polls still show her polling more strongly against McCain than Obama does.

And THAT is why David's OP makes so much sense.

We do not have a unity ticket now. And I'm sorry that we don't, though I like Biden. I think Obama/Biden is a pretty good second-best to Obama/Clinton.

But I will not pretend that the polls didn't show a unity ticket would have helped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. Then UNITE with the party already......
...or should the party unite with you?


Second-best my ass. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes3000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. It would have helped with Dems at the expense of Independents.
And that makes it murky.

Someone inside the party has hard number analysis on this. I would have loved to see it. Because I was on the fence about which was the smarter path.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #66
76. I know stuff was said on both sides
And it was both impassioned and strident. That is not the issue.


The issue is that once it was decided either way, that should have been enough. It was not the Clinton Party vs. the Obama Party, it was Democrats picking their nominee.

36 million people voted in the Democratic primaries. Those should be 36 million reliable Democratic votes that the nominee can bank on. There shouldn't be any need for any wheedling or ass-kissing is the point I'm trying to make.

The person that wins the nomination gets to pick the VP. That's the current system. It can be changed, of course, if the DNC were to re-write the rules. But the VP pick is a strategic decision that needs to be based on more than who came in second at the convention.

But this in-fighting needs to stop. There's a difference between reporting a fact as news and reporting news that become a self-fulfilling fact. The MSM wanted a horse race between Obama and Clinton because they wanted the ratings and advertising dollars, and now they want one between Obama and McCain, so they report news that become self-fulfilling fact.

Note about three weeks ago that McCain had about a dozen serious campaing gaffs in a single week! Phil Gramm calling us "whiners", lobbying scandals, CBS editing out his gaffs, etc., yet all that was just kind of glossed over to keep McCain in the race.



And having the party a bit more unified doesn't help if that extra unity comes at the expense of mobilizing and motivating the reich wing. I'm sick and tired of squeeker victories. I want the Repubs crushed. I want a friggin' landslide! I want to see shell-shocked Republicans aimlessly wandering round DC, lost and helpless. I want the electoral map to look like Reagan vs. Dukakis, only reversed!




The polls still show her polling more strongly against McCain than Obama does.


Obama's been the target of McCain ads for 10 weeks, not her. That kind of polling information is meaningless because it's the Clinton of 10 weeks ago we're talking about. I'm sure that 10 weeks ago Obama had a sizable lead on McCain as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
62. Have a good week
I'm sure you'll be ready to go to work and drop this once and for all after the convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
publicatlarge Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
68. Excellent post, David...
..sadly wasted on this group here. To be intelligent, fair minded, politically savvy, insightful. Ah, well. Just not appreciated by many who are diligently shaping their own reality.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metric System Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:10 AM
Response to Original message
71. Reading through these comments is disheartening. Yes, Obama gets my vote, but I don't see how any of
you can expect goodwill or unity. Then again, I don't think most of you are interested in that, anyway. It's one thing to tell Hillary supporters to "get over it" and support Obama, but the problem is when you expect us to tolerate the continued Hillary-bashing that goes on here. The rules of DU state that you can't bash the nominee (which is a great rule, don't get me wrong) but I feel that primary Obama supporters here take advantage of it knowing they can bash Hillary and her supporters and rehash the primaries without fear of repercussion, whereas we have to watch how we respond to stay within the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
73. I agree in many ways.
Hillary Clinton is an amazing woman who has done some amazing things.

I'm not sure that she didn't know that she would not be VP. I would guess that much thought was put into how to handle the VP question, and, like the primaries themselves, it was drawn out for a reason.

But DU'ers and DU'ers. And we all know that this forum can get ugly at times.

It is only now that I'm understanding that the point of an Obama/Clinton ticket is to keep half of her supporters from staying home. It hadn't occurred to me that they would. Naivete at its finest. But now I get it. All the more reason to remind the anti-Hillary-supporter crowd how much we need them.

So I guess I'll say it again.

Please don't piss off the Democratic Hillary-supporters, because we cannot afford for them to stay at home and skip the election.

Given that I was never a Hillary supporter, and I get it, maybe eventually, others will too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quakerboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
74. Thanks for a thought through post
If you check in, thanks for the arguments. You never did persuade me to your view. But I could tell you were thinking about things, even if you came up with the wrong (defined as disagreeing with me) answers. I look forward to having you back soon, hopefully with a fresh perspective and some fire to improve things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-25-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
78. Why are we still talking about Obama supporters
and Hillary supporters as if they're two separate groups?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC