A brief introduction/disclaimer: a popular topic on MyDD recently has been the increase in the number of 'hit diaries' dealing with the presidential race and the lack of diaries focus on the issues of substance. While I don't think this is a hit diary, it is certainly focused on the race rather than the issues. The issues are important, but it is also important for us to analyze why we obsess over the campaign minutiae, and why often discussion of the campaign turns nasty.
When I first started reading political blogs, I was eager for any information about Republican mess-ups and offensive conservative talking points. I relished in the liberal blogs' righteous indignation about these outrages. And there were many, from the disaster that was Hurricane Katrina to the Bill O'Reilly phone-sex scandal. However, as time went on, the blogs' attention turned towards the 2008 Democratic nomination, and with this attention came a swell of support for various candidates. You're all aware of this, of course. I point this out not to rehash fairly obvious recent history, but to emphasize the shift in focus in the liberal (and probably conservative, I don't know) blogosphere.
One of the most interesting aspects of this shift was how the swell of support was distributed among the candidates. It's no surprise that Hillary Clinton hasn't received a large amount of support, and the less well-known candidates have had a bit of a hard time. The most significant feature, then, at least on the Internet, of the booming interest in the 2008 race is the distinction between the supporters of Barack Obama and John Edwards.
On the surface, there are not many differences between your average Obama supporter and your Edwards supporter. Both are probably concerned about the state of the country, confident in the left's ability to make positive changes, and wussy bleeding hearts (kidding). Both should, in all likelihood, support the same candidate. However, these have become the largest and most hostile opposing camps in the liberal blogosphere.
As an Obama supporter, I can only speak for one side of this fight. I support Obama because, after reading both of his books and listening to his speeches, I think that he is a unique political figure and has the potential to change the country for the better unlike any politician in a long time. I also think his positions, which often thoughtfully set aside idealogy and focus on what will help the most, will be the most beneficial to the country. I like John Edwards, but have some qualms about his sincerity.
But concerning the snippy-comment war going on between the two rival camps: I believe that for the Obama side, part of this frustration stems from the perception offered by some in the blogosphere that Edwards is the only candidate a true liberal or progressive could even think of supporting. At least, this is how I often feel. I feel like as an Obama supporter, I am sometimes looked down upon as a sap, fallen prey to Obama's charisma and star power and the corporate media (or, as it is so cloyingly referenced in the blogs, the MSM). I get a sense that SOME Edwards supporter have a holier-than-thou attitude, a sense that not only are their principles more pure than those of other candidate's supporters, but that because of this purity the mainstream is out to get them. Personally, I don't think I could stomach another remark about how the media is "afraid" of John Edwards.
However, I understand that this is just one man's opinion. I'm interested to hear what my fellow Obama supporters think, and also what you Edwards folks feel like on your side of the divide. I only request that we keep it civil...
|
|
|
Permalink :: 208 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
