Winning Without Hillary Will Be Tough

by comingawakening, Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:08:40 AM EST

It will be difficult, if not impossible to win the GE in November without the support of team HRC. There I said it.

I attended Saturday's RBC meeting. I spent most of my time on the floor and focussed some of my time reaching out to the friendlier HRC supporters. I will admit that it was tough because a good majority were upset with the RBC, Chairman Dean, the media, and some where even upset at Obama directly.

While I can argue some of these points, it was pointless - I wasn't going to convince too many folks. Even though I met four folks that left with a more positive feeling after we spent time together while the meeting was in a lunch break. We took turns listening to each other while sharing concerns, issues, and we even discussed policy difference and similarities.

It was a great experience. But these conversations, reminded me of a famous quote I heard a few years ago. Bill Clinton is quoted as saying that "Republicans like to fall in line and Democrats like to fall in love."

It was easy to see that we were all in love with our candidates. Which on paper is good but it can hurt us if we don't control this emotion. If allow our "love" for one candidate to impair our judgement as Democrats, we risk losing another 4 or 8 years to an administration that does not care for Americans. McCain does not care for woman's rights and gender equality. McCain does not care about fixing our Health Care crisis. More recently, McCain has sided directly with Bush on tax cuts for the wealthy and more importantly on Iraq.

I know there will always be some Democrats that may not come around to voting for Obama. I would question whether they are true Democrats in the first place. Perhaps they are really independents or even Republicans that enjoy conflict.

We need all Democrats to fall in line and fall out of love.

There's one additional point I will make regarding elections.

In most elections, the winner receives anywhere between 60%-80% of their votes from hard core supporters and strong leaners. These are the folks the "like" the candidate. But in all elections, even the winning candidate get votes from those that didn't like them.

These people wished they had someone that met their personal needs or ideals more directly. However, the thing that made these voters vote for someone they "disliked" was the fact that they thought his/her opponent was even worse.

I guess my point is to say that you don't necessarily have to vote for Obama. Maybe you can't just vote against McBush?

You know, sometimes it takes time to fall in love anyway. One good example is that my wife and I were friends for 4 years before we dated. Now, we've been together for 24 years. Just a thought. Thanks!

Obama 08!




Tags: obama, clinton, election, support (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 30 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Winning Without Hillary Will Be Tough (none / 0)

I am fully in favor of a unity ticket.


by phoenixdreamz on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:12:47 AM EST

Re: Winning Without Hillary Will Be Tough (2.00 / 1)

If Obama decides to do it, I will back him 1000%. I've changed my mind on this question over the past few weeks though I still wish HRC would have been more positive. But I will leave it to Obama since he will have to manage the White House and the administration. I hope you understand my point.


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:15:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There will be questions about his legitimacy... (2.00 / 3)

Why couldn't they have saved face and simply had a revote in both states by mail, or let the uncommitted delegates make up their own minds, The theft of 50% of the votes is the kind of backroom deal that poisons elections. Its going to leave a lot of people so angry they might not vote in November. As it stands right now, I think it is such a long shot for Obama to win that I dont think anybody would put money on it. You pundits live in some kind of vacumn and you dont realize that not the entire world thinks like you. There are things like fairness and emotion that make many people think that evil should not be rewarded. Its called altruism and its the reason animals continue to exist.


public option=not affordable for middle. It cant cover all affordably, google adverse selection for why
by architek on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:35:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There will be questions about his legitimacy.. (none / 0)

And yet you have NO questions about a candidate who, had her side gotten its way, would have been awarded delegates in a Soviet style beauty contest wherein the primary competition wasn't on the ballot.

Sorry, but there wasn't a "fair" solution in Michigan.


Torture me once, shame on you; torture me and get away with it, shame on us all.
by freedom78 on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:06:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Not legal in either state (none / 0)

Florida doesn't allow mail-in ballots.

Michigan's primary was flawed due to Democrats voting in the Republican primary on account of their Democratic primary not counting.

Legal problems crippled both options.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:14:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

not true. (2.00 / 1)

It was fully within the power of the state parties to conduct a party primary or caucus that would have fully met with party rules.  There is no reason that an election or caucus conducted by a political party has to follow state election laws.


d
by d on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:50:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Uh... (none / 0)

I guess I can't argue with the argument that you don't have to follow the rules.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:00:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

please refer to the comment by Bored Now below. (none / 0)

You are confusing state-run elections with political party procedures and operations.


d
by d on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:43:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

not true... (none / 0)

the legal issues were not the reason why florida democrats chose not to use a mail-in ballot.  the state party could have done whatever it wanted -- it simply does not have the knowledge-base, the tradition or the resources to run an election.  clinton's efforts (presumably for the purpose of embarrassing obama) to get the county supervisors of elections to run them failed...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:13:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

bullshit... (none / 0)

i'm really sorry your candidate ran a shitty campaign, but hillary has no one to blame but herself.

florida had no interest in voting again.  none.  people i talked to in eight counties around the i-4 corridor were more interested in seeing no delegates seated than re-voting.  we already have a primary election scheduled (in september) and it was impossible to meet all the legal requirements for that election and vote again.

two supervisors of election told the clinton campaign (or supporters -- the soe's thought they were dealing with the clinton campaing) that they had no interest in helping with their proposal because they didn't trust the clinton campaign to pay them.  can you blame them?  my understanding is that they could only get 3 (out of 67) soe's to agree to their (the clinton) proposal for a revote.

you can't blame anyone but hillary for her campaign debt and you certainly cannot blame the soe's (many of whom are republicans) for rejecting the clinton campaign proposal.  they were definitely more concerned about what is fair to the voters in florida than some candidate who's history with florida democrats is tainted, at best.

bitch all you want, but hillary ran a shitty campaign and our elected officials reacted appropriately to that fact.  we'd have voted them out of office if they tried to force a new election and a new debt upon us, especially since the only rational you offer is that it would make people less emotional (something i seriously doubt).

i realize that you did not want a fact-based reply.  sorry...


"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009
by bored now on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:11:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this snark? (2.00 / 1)

You should think about getting a summer job or something.

This perseverating is going to drive you banannas eventually.


by phoenixdreamz on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:37:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is this snark? (2.00 / 1)

No. Serious answer.


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:38:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

We'll get most of them (none / 0)

I'm not talking about party obligation or fear of the Supreme Court that McCain will nominate or leaving the Iraq mess for the next president to clean up in 2013, I'm talking about Obama winning the votes the old fashioned way, with strong campaigning and making his case.

We saw it yesterday in South Dakota.  He finished his speech with the One Voice riff... an inspirational message that will resonate with Americans for the general election.  That segment was one of the things that I sent to my mother prior to the Wisconsin primary, and helped her make her decision to vote Obama instead of Clinton (the other things I sent were Lawrence Lessig's discussions of the candidates and Obama's MLK Day speech).

I think Barack has a plan... just like he had a plan for this whole campaign, and we should trust his judgement.


You can't stop the signal.

President "That One"

by Dracomicron on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:17:08 AM EST

Re: We'll get most of them (2.00 / 1)

I agree. But I think it is up to us Obama supporters to listen and earn the trust of the HRC supporters - the reasonable ones. I met a few really angry and means at the RBC meeting. I was shocked to have people not even want to shake hands. I had one blogger scream at me because he overhead me making a point that he obviously didn't like. This guy, is not going to change his mind. But 70-80% of the folks there are open minded enough to heal along with us.


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:20:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama has to ask her (2.00 / 2)


He has no choice, if he doesn't he will have to answer the question "why not hillary?" over and over.

If he doesn't, he risks loosing too large a portioin of Hillary's supporters.

Now from Hillary's point of view. If Obama loses, she will be blamed, no mater what, the people who don't believe that don't watch tv. In the end, the only way she would not be is if he doesn't ask her.

On the other end, if she is asked and says no, the blame is on her, guarenteed.

So it comes down to this:

  1. Obama needs to ask her but doesn't want her to accept.
  2. Hillary doesn't want to be asked, but has to accept if she is.


by TaiChiMaster on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:26:35 AM EST

Re: Obama has to ask her (none / 0)

Talk about compromise! Good analysis.


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:33:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary Will Be Tough (none / 0)

"In the primaries we vote with our hearts, but in the general election we should vote with our HEAD."

Bill Clinton


by venician on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:30:06 AM EST

Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (2.00 / 2)

RBC disastrous decision created more problems than solved, unity unachievable until 4 stolen MI delegates will be returned to Hillary, uncommitted will be taken back from Obama, and Florida and Michigan voting power will be restored.

  • all Obama has are blacks, kids and some random subset of so called "liberals".
  • Hillary has core groups: white working class, (growing fast) latinos, women and seniors.
  • It means that RBC improved the chance that many Hillary supporters will vote for McCain.
  • Majority of Latinos will not vote Obama and McCain will have majority of Latino votes.

I see only one way to prevent disaster in November: supers will endorse Hillary


Landslide of lies
by engels on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 10:45:39 AM EST

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (2.00 / 1)

she is doing better in CT (Obama won it):
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/state_topline s/connecticut/toplines_connecticut_presi dential_election_may_29_2008
in blue states:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/state_topline s/massachusetts/toplines_massachusetts_p residential_race_may_29_2008
in red states with large black population (won by Obama thanks to racial vote):
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/state_topline s/louisiana/toplines_louisiana_president _may_28_2008
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_conte nt/politics/election_20082/state_topline s/alabama/toplines_alabama_president_may _27_2008
and she is doing much better in swing states and even in states like NC, MO, AR, KY, WV.
And she has support from latinos, women, seniors and working whites.

Landslide of lies
by engels on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:02:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (none / 0)

The Democratic party is not a party where you get to pick and chose what YOU want. Do you think that people who voted for Obama are worth less than Clinton votes? Are you saying that the woman who voted for Clinton (gender vote) was more meaningful that your statement about Obama winning the black vote (racial vote)?

I am not sure what you are saying exactly. Obama won more votes, more states, and more delegates which is based on winning votes where Democrats actually live and the only way to win the nomination.

Do your homework. You sound like the unreasonable rules changers I met at the RBC.


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (2.00 / 1)

she won more votes and more states which will be important in November.
RBC decision is illegal attempt by Obama supporters to steal the nomination
Landslide of lies
by engels on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:20:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (none / 0)

You are in the 5% group that is willing to lie in order to steal the election for Clinton. I am not sure how you bring up your children or how you play your sports but you can't say one thing before the game and then say another afterwards when you lose the game. It's that simple and you know it but you are not willing to be honest. Good for you but we don't need unreasonable people to even vote because it will help the country.

Why don't you just vote for McCain and help your country suffer more because your candidate did not win. That really sounds sane, doesn't it?


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:48:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (none / 0)

Obvoiusly only because you care for Floridians and Michiganders - right?


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:07:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (none / 0)

In 2004. Nationally,
The White Voting Age Population was 77%. John Kerry got 41% of the White vote.
The Black Voting Age Population was 11%. John Kerry got 88% of the Black vote.
The Hispanic Voting Age Population was 8%. John Kerrt got 53% of the Hispanic vote.

In 2008 Nationally
The Black voting age population is going to be 15%. Barack Obama will get 95% of the black vote.
This Hispanic voting age population is going to be 10%. Barack Obama is going to get 60% of the Hispanic vote. I don't believe majority of the Hispanics will vote for McCain.
The White voting age population is going to be 70%. Barack Obama is going to get at least 40% of the White vote and 55% of the Asian vote.

The biggest issue is can Obama break 40% of the White vote. John Kerry got 44% of the White Women Vote. Can Barack Obama get at least 45% of the White Women vote.


by nkpolitics on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:49:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (2.00 / 1)

You are wrong about Hispanic population: it is 15% (not 10% as you trying to assert) and growing much faster than black population (Latinos will be 30% sooner than you think), see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanics_i n_the_United_States
Hispanic vote consistently less than 40% for Obama, in most cases close to 30%.

You are wrong about black population: it is less than 13%, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Ame rican

White vote will be less than 40% for Obama because they will listen GOP propaganda about black racial vote and about his church, just preview it on Fox.


Landslide of lies
by engels on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:30:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning Without Hillary is not Possible (none / 0)

Regarding the Hispanic vote- Barack Obama's 30% performance is based on the Primary not the General Election.

I was watching Geraldo Rivera interviewing to Hispanic Actors- after the Puerto Rico Results. Cheech Marin who is endorsing Obama and Paul Rodriguez who is endorsing Hillary.

The reason why Hispanics and Asians(Indian-descend like myself)are overwhelmingly supporting Hillary Clinton is because we know Hillary Clinton because of her husband, we like Hillary Clinton because of her husband Hillary's husband has done a lot good stuff for our country and communtiy.

Barack Obama is an unknown quantity to lot of Hispanics and Asians.

Regarding McCain- Hispanics and Asians will vote have a problem with McCain being a Republican but unlike most Republicans- McCain is not anti immigartion extremist.


by nkpolitics on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 04:25:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Winning without Obama would have beenTough. (none / 0)


d
by d on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 11:53:03 AM EST

Re: Winning Without Hillary Will Be Tough (none / 0)

If the situation were opposite and Senator Clinton were about the win a closely contested primary over Senator Obama, the "grass is always greener" polls would currently show Obama doing slightly better than Clinton against McCain.  The reactionary hurt feelings polls are not reliable.  In the end most democrats will vote for the dem nominee after their feeling heal a bit.


by Democrat in Chicago on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 12:09:33 PM EST

Hey man (none / 0)

much better diary than the YHC diary.  I am going to rec this.


Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!
by Student Guy on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 01:41:29 PM EST

Re: Hey man (none / 0)

thanks for the feedback!


Obama 08!
by comingawakening on Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 03:16:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

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.

Login
Username:

Password: