I've noticed a general trend in many of the posts here on D & D and in general rhetoric from supporters of Obama that generally portray Hillary Clinton as evil and paint the campaign in terms of a moral struggle. In my opinion this is a highly simplistic view and one that is very disrespectful towards not only the Clinton campaign but to Clinton supporters. While understandably Obama supporters are very passionate about supporting their candidate but that is also forgetting that at the same time there are very passionate supporters of Clinton too. Obama supporters though have felt free to call Clinton "evil", "corrupt" and the Clinton campaign a "horror show". By extension then wouldn't that mean that supporters of Clinton are also evil and that their support isn't just a difference of political opinion but a moral failing. This is very strong stuff for two campaigns that have almost identical platforms and especially for a campaign that is supposed to be about unity to have supporters of one calling the other evil. Also in regard to this struggle Obama supporters have been taking the line that the Clinton campaign should give up for the good of the party. I find this odd considering that in terms of delegates and votes they are still close, counting Michigan and Florida Clinton would lead in the popular votes, but it is also disrepectful of supporters of the Clinton campaign particurly since Obama supporters not that long ago were challenging the idea of getting behind Clinton when she was the presumptive front runner. Both campaigns are out to win and it shouldn't be a surprise that they are doing all they can to win. It isn't anymore evil that Clinton is looking to use the rules regarding delegate loyalties to seek to win as Obama is lookign to use the rules to keep the Michigan and Florida delegates out of the convention. So while people might support one candidate or the other for various reasons I think it is a disservice to argue this in moral terms when the candidates basically agree on most of the issues.
You're obviously on the side of Beelzebub. Only a demon could persuade you it's not a moral struggle when it so clearly is... Repent now, before it's too late.
You think their morality is defined by their stance on the issues? Interesting that bigtexxx finds so much truth in your post, since that would then imply that McCain is very immoral due to his much different stance on most issues. Hillary's morality has been defined by her actions. I don't know how old you are, but many peoples' stance on Clinton is because we recall her and her husband's notable and repeated transgressions years ago.... which went on and on. If you are not familiar with them and the way the Clinton political machine operates, why not familizarize yourself before whining about how your support of her taints you in the eyes of others? It doesn't take much reading to become disgusted with those two.
I don't think it's evil, I think it's sleazy. To state that pledged delegates shouldn't actually represent the voters they were elected to represent is sleaze. To play on the fears of people and suggest that if Obama gets elected American's children won't be safe, is sleazy. To say that McCain is more experienced to be CC than Obama is underhanded, and a stupid strategy. This is another thing that calls into question her judgement. The only thing it says about hillary's supporters are that they find things other than her sleaze more important in the election. If that wasn't the case they wouldn't support her. I don't care if she drops out or not. I think that after winning TX. and OH. she has earned the right to stay in. She hasn't earned the right to campaign in such a sleazy way, though.
While there are a lot of generalizations in your post, one thing obama has the high ground on is number of delegates. so as long as he has the popular vote and delegate total in the states that they agreed to be in play, he can claim she should drop out especially since its very unlikely she'll catch up on either front.
Then you've completely missed the point. It's been long said both Dem candidates have very similar stances on the issues. The "morality" thing (since you call it that) isn't about stances on issues. It's about style. If you look at how both candidates have managed their campaigns, they couldn't be more different. How many times has Hillary shifted direction and remade herself? Her chaotic and jumpy campaign doesn't bode well for her White House. So far, Obama has been fairly consistent on his message and methods, which is refreshing to me and why I would consider voting for him in November. When I conceive of a Hillary administration, I think the primary values will be tight secrecy, loyalty, vindictiveness, extreme partisan rhetoric, etc which reminds me of the current one. With Obama, I think he will choose people based more on competence, which could include a couple of Republicans in his cabinet. He doesn't have the long enemies list Hillary has and he also doesn't have a lengthy list of old Dem retreads who want another turn.
I'm hoping Obama is the candidate because I think he has the best chance of winning. And Ms. Clinton has gone off the deep end with her Obama/McCain/Clinton comparison, but to compare a potential Clinton II administration on an equal basis with the Bush Administration most of us hope we survive is simply, with all due respect, ludicrous. Geez. Impeach Bush.
From and independent standpoint, comparing Hillary and Bush II stylistically is very appropriate. From your standpoint as a Dem, I can understand why you disagree.
Ummm, no. Why would it? That's a major difference between the two campaigns. The Clinton campaign has, multiple times, dismissed Obama supporters as naive, unimportant, not "getting real", etc. At no time has the Obama campaign EVER, in any way, dismissed, criticized, or belittled Clinton supporters. What Obama supporters do is irrelevant to the campaign, such as what Clinton supporters and McCain supporters do are irrelevant to their campaigns. Why on earth would supporting Clinton mean you have a moral failing? Why couldn't it be simply that you have a different view of what is most important or who would make the best President?
Hmm.. Obama and Bush both claimed themselves to be uniters. Both are more likeable than the other candidate....
That is exactly why I was/am weary of Obama. We went down this path before. I understand that Bush and Obama are two totally different people but we still have a lot of unknown factors for Obama. I'm still trying to decide how genuine he is about uniting the people without everyone telling me to just go along with him.
Bush's slash and burn campaign in 2000 was the exact opposite of Obama has done so far in 2007/08. From my standpoint, Obama is the anti-Bush. If he is elected president, we can only hope that proves to be true.
I'm quite familiar with the Clintons' record and didn't vote for Bill. As I said before I have little illusions regarding them but from what I know of their records I wouldn't consider them much worse than most politicians out there especially the current occupant of the Whitehouse. I might just be cynical but I beleive that every politician has some dark past as pretty much every human has major flaws. I also believe that running for president involves a high degree of self-confidence and belief in one self that is essentially narcissitic. Also given the grind of campaigning and fund raising requires some level of ruthlessness and sleaziness. So I will agree with many of the sentiments regarding Hillary Clinton. Perhaps I'm crazy but I look at the issues and I consider what the Clinton presidency was like and I saw results there. For all of Bill Clinton's personal failings he did a good job. For all of Hillary Clinton's personal failings she's done a decent job in the Senate. If a Hillary admin is essentially Bill Clinton part III I think that will actually be good for the country.
Except that Obama is now saying he will go after Clinton much harder and has at times gone after Clinton hard, such as his comment about Clinton being on the board of Walmart. Personally I have no problems with him doing so and think it is the right thing as he will need to respond to Republican attacks if he makes it to the general but it does show that when things get really tough he is willing to take few steps down from the high road. I find that very interesting considering the dinosaur of old Democrats, Ted Kennedy, is supporting Obama also considering that Obama has many of those retreads from the Bill Clinton Admin. as his advisors.
I used to think that way too. It's why I initially voted for Hillary last tuesday. However, after seeing what she's been doing since then, I've changed my stance yet again. Yes the 90s was good under Bill, but to think that Hillary can get us back to the good times is a little too optimistic for me. That was the past, let's leave it at that.
I see them as looking at the world from a different lens than I do. No. I think Bush is pretty horrible too, but I don't view all Republicans that way. They simply have different views and perspectives than I do. The Op-ed only used the term evil in this statement: Last week, in response to the Obama camp’s request that they release their tax returns, Clinton’s spokesman called Obama a new Ken Starr. For the Clintons, all Democrats who oppose them are . . . Republicans. And all Republicans are evil. And evil means that anything the Clintons do in self-defence is excusable It called the Clintons many things, but never said they were evil (unless you're referring to another op-ed - if so, my bad). I think the Clintons are selfish people who's only priority is themselves. Ambitious, unethical, destructive, etc. I wouldn't call them evil in the sense of being one of the true villians of the world, but I have used the term to describe them before.
That's a very fair assesment and I will admit that much of my comfort level with Hillary Clinton has to do with the Bill Clinton Admin. and it would be hard to duplicate that. That said that at least gives me some idea what a Hillary Clinton Admin. might be like but I don't have a good sense of what an Obama Admin. will be like.
