Obama's Negatives Don't Become Hillary's Positives!
"What Part Of Obama Can't Win The General Elections Don't His Backers "Get?"
By Fyrefoxxe - May 6th, 2008 at 5:45 am EDT
http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/Fyrefoxxe/CRyY#comments
Your logic in your post is so, so, so flawed, because of the following;
1. NO creditability on CHANGE:
I have continuously stated that Clinton's argument of experience as an unconventionally active First Lady wasn't a good strategy. It only highlighted her own weakness of a padded resume and connects her to the contentious past; not change.
If this election was based on experience McCain would win against both our candidates, but it is about CHANGE. Increasingly the Clintons have damaged their creditability on being instrument of change when each them have engaged in Washington politics as usually, the "politics of personal destruction", the phase they coined.
Change means not returning to the 1990's government gridlock and shutdowns due to, not just policy differences but personality clashes. The American people REJECT Bill Clinton's statement of politics being a contact sport and kitchen sink politics!
2. Each candidate can't be accountable for all the statements and beliefs of others:
Each of us has friends, family and associates in which we do not agree totally with ALL of their BELIEFS. Why are candidates expected to admonish every statement and belief of their associates? It's enough of a battle dealing with their own statements and beliefs being misconstrued and distorted.
The resistance to the tide of change and Obama's transcending race, would like to create the following simple equation;
Wright =racist+ Wright=Obama+ Obama =racist
But this equation, with all its added variables, DOESN'T ADD UP!
3. The leader in a race doesn't quit:
Why should Obama, a newcomer who energized a disillusionment party, added new voters, created broad support across America, won more races, has just as much legislative experience, and has managed a better campaign suppress his call to serve and step down when has been in FIRST place?
Why has more average American people "put their money where the mouth is" and contributed overwhelmingly to Obama?
4. Hillary Clinton is still plagued by her own likeability and electability issues and has a difficult argument to make to overturn the leader in the race:
The phenomenal rise of Obama is not just a testament to his strength but a rejection to Clinton's initial inevitability and presumed better resume. Why haven't she been the leader in this race, when the American people have known her for many years?
The "big states argument" she is promoting is flawed because she won by such small margins in each win, accept in her neighboring state of PA. Will the big states that are DEM states go Republican if she isn't the nominee? I think not!
The Republicans are just as armed and ready to attack Hillary Clinton. There is no one that can energize their disillusioned base as the Clintons. Initially the Republicans struggled with how to fight Obama without appearing like the usual race baiters they are. The Clintons will have to account for granting the go ahead to the GOP by participating in the whole spectacle.
Her argument of readiness is weakened by the poor management of the direction of her campaign and her judgement on the war. In a former Clinton aide's book, Hillary's(fighter)combative litigator instincts was contributed to the failure of healthcare reform in the 1990's.
Obama's negatives don't become her positives! Like there are frightened and bigoted voters that Obama could never reach; there are new voters, young voters, and independents Hillary Clinton could never reach.
By Fyrefoxxe - May 6th, 2008 at 5:45 am EDT
http://www.democrats.org/page/community/post/Fyrefoxxe/CRyY#comments
Your logic in your post is so, so, so flawed, because of the following;
1. NO creditability on CHANGE:
I have continuously stated that Clinton's argument of experience as an unconventionally active First Lady wasn't a good strategy. It only highlighted her own weakness of a padded resume and connects her to the contentious past; not change.
If this election was based on experience McCain would win against both our candidates, but it is about CHANGE. Increasingly the Clintons have damaged their creditability on being instrument of change when each them have engaged in Washington politics as usually, the "politics of personal destruction", the phase they coined.
Change means not returning to the 1990's government gridlock and shutdowns due to, not just policy differences but personality clashes. The American people REJECT Bill Clinton's statement of politics being a contact sport and kitchen sink politics!
2. Each candidate can't be accountable for all the statements and beliefs of others:
Each of us has friends, family and associates in which we do not agree totally with ALL of their BELIEFS. Why are candidates expected to admonish every statement and belief of their associates? It's enough of a battle dealing with their own statements and beliefs being misconstrued and distorted.
The resistance to the tide of change and Obama's transcending race, would like to create the following simple equation;
Wright =racist+ Wright=Obama+ Obama =racist
But this equation, with all its added variables, DOESN'T ADD UP!
3. The leader in a race doesn't quit:
Why should Obama, a newcomer who energized a disillusionment party, added new voters, created broad support across America, won more races, has just as much legislative experience, and has managed a better campaign suppress his call to serve and step down when has been in FIRST place?
Why has more average American people "put their money where the mouth is" and contributed overwhelmingly to Obama?
4. Hillary Clinton is still plagued by her own likeability and electability issues and has a difficult argument to make to overturn the leader in the race:
The phenomenal rise of Obama is not just a testament to his strength but a rejection to Clinton's initial inevitability and presumed better resume. Why haven't she been the leader in this race, when the American people have known her for many years?
The "big states argument" she is promoting is flawed because she won by such small margins in each win, accept in her neighboring state of PA. Will the big states that are DEM states go Republican if she isn't the nominee? I think not!
The Republicans are just as armed and ready to attack Hillary Clinton. There is no one that can energize their disillusioned base as the Clintons. Initially the Republicans struggled with how to fight Obama without appearing like the usual race baiters they are. The Clintons will have to account for granting the go ahead to the GOP by participating in the whole spectacle.
Her argument of readiness is weakened by the poor management of the direction of her campaign and her judgement on the war. In a former Clinton aide's book, Hillary's(fighter)combative litigator instincts was contributed to the failure of healthcare reform in the 1990's.
Obama's negatives don't become her positives! Like there are frightened and bigoted voters that Obama could never reach; there are new voters, young voters, and independents Hillary Clinton could never reach.
We will have to see how the votes turnout today to finish this argument.
Because of Wright, Obama hates the white that gave him life? This is pure ignorance! The people who want to believe this weren't voting for him anyway.
Amen. To me it initially a hard choice between the two; however, I voted for Obama in the primary - still really undecided.
My problem with the race issue is the fact that the man is half white and half black, and that makes him 100% black? Really? Are we still using the one-drop rule? So - the color of the man's skin makes him 100% black? I'm just trying to understand!
I appreciate your question regarding Obama identifying himself as a black man.
As a fair skinned African American that many assume is of mixed race, I'm well schooled on the complexities of race in America.
I stated the following in a previous blog;
"A great deal of the public has heard of his mixed heritage; a black African Kenya father and white Kansan mother. Since we don't have our percentages of ethnicity stamped on us and given his ethnic appearance, Obama had to experience life as a black man. Surely, the disclosure or discovery of his mixed race by others, allowed him no free pass from discrimination."
I hope that helps.
Thanks - your explanation makes sense, but to identify with only one race denies the inclusion of the other which was more important in his upbringing. I guess, I'm just trying to say that it really should not be important in this day and age.
You know all of this talk about Wright is a travesty and a diversion by individuals who had no intent to vote for Obama. Maybe - why not just say you are a bigot and be done with it! Some of the posters are past the point of being passionate for Hillary, and maybe are not aware that between the lines, their posts reek of racism. Stop being a hyprocrite. God knows the truth of your heart, and you will not be able to fool him on the day that we will all be on time for our said appointment.
No media coverage of Hlllary's pastor of 15 years who still to this day praises Hitler, and McCain's pastor who stated Katrina was God's wrath on homosexuals.
Oh well.....................
It shouldn't be important. Obama didn't get the choice of deciding on being identified as Black, his appearance and society dictated for him.
After my mother was separated then later died, I was forced to attempt the difficult task of teaching my brothers how to be black men in America. His white grandparents were even less equipped with the knowledge to help Obama face being a black man in an unequal society. I have friends that didn't even consider the difference in hair care when having an inter-racial child, forget about instilling cultural identity.
I think being positive and trying to counter the limited expectations our children are exposed to daily, is a good start toward raising positive, responsible adults.
Tolerance, Tolerance, Tolerance.
Embracing our differences instead of teaching and preaching conformity.
Great post and dialog.
peace to you, my friend,
marsha
I don't know about other folks, but, I've never met a minister who could be told what to say or do. They have a mission from God and can sometimes forget they are the vessel, not the final word. Each of us has to follow our own inner voice. I think Obama follows his and I appreciate where it takes him.
I especially like your statement about his mother as "the one who gave him life." That's hitting it spot on about any possible racism on his part.
I happen to believe that Obama's are lower.
but. . .
speak with others and you will get a different story.
Tho I am impressed by both our candidates, I was not impressed with the negative comments about Obama by the Clinton campaign, it was, to my mind, desparation.
Poor advice. She's better than that.
I think the voters agreed. Voters are tired after 7 years of "with us or against us" mentality.
We, jointly, both camps, need to guard against falling to the lowest common denominator.
peace,
marsha