Well, while I had serious problems with many of the Obama supporters over at dailykos during the primary season, they are not the candidate himself. I've not seen anything untoward coming from Obama personally - in fact, he's run a pretty positive camapign in total.
So, count me as a Clinton supporter who will happily cost his vote for Obama.
I really don't see how any seriously issues-oriented former Clinton supporter could do otherwise. To vote for McCain is to vote contrary to so many issues true Democrats (regardless of whom one backed in the primary) hold dear.
Therefore, I am forced to conclude that those Democrats who have deserted to McCain were either 1) really not interested in the future direction of the country, 2) not interested in the issues, 3) unable to get over the psychic bruises of the primary, or 4) trolls. Of course it could also be a mix-n-match of any or all of these!
Proud to have supported Clintons in 1992, 1996 and 2008. Also proud to support Obama!
I heartily concur with your comments about talking to the other side. If we don't, then we show total disrespect for the other side (North Korea, Iran, etc.), which is not a useful starting point for getting what we want from them. We can talk with them - and, if things do not work out, having talked does not take away any of the other options available to us.
We have really good evidence on how the "no talking" strategy does not work. We've not talked with Cuba in decades. After 40-plus years, no progress. Even worse, our attitude has made Castro a hero in the eyes of his people.
Wasn't it Einstein who said something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, as a good working definition of insanity?
Jodie Rell is better than Ms. Palin. So is Jeanne Shaheen!
Isn't is funny how Nancy, allegedly a radical feminist, will blithely back the pary of Phyllis Schafly? Some folks will go for the token, rather than the substance. Let's not forget that the only reason the Equal Rights Amendment was never ratified is that the Republicans, long-time supporters of the amendment, did the old Benedict Arnold act when Mr. Reagan was elected.
Ranks right up there with governors Spiro Agnew, James McGreevey, Arch Moore, Wally Barron, Don Siegelman, George Ryan, Guy Hunt, William Woods Holden, Ewin Edwards, Otto Kerner, Jackson Franklin, Eliot Spitzer, John Rowland, La Fayette Grover, James Ferguson, Frank Murkowksi......
My gosh! LesGovt's opinions are now, according to him, the truth. And, even more amusing, now he's surprised that folks "want to start abusing me."
Pity. Well, actually, self-pity by LesGovt! His little boat of arrogance seems to have sprung a weepy leak. It only the proper treatment of someone who has proclaimed his own opinion as the truth!
Here is my opinion as to what will happen to conservatism. It will spend considerable time in the wilderness, well deserved, thanks to the antics of Bush and the neo-cons. I agree, BTW, with LesGovt, that the current elected Repubicans are mostly not real conservatives. Their fiscal record alone proves that! I believe that McCain will lose badly in the fall, signalling the end of the current, aging Republican coalition. Then a fight for idealogical control of the Republican Party will ensue, which will take some years to sort out.
As to the possibility of the imminent rise of a truly conservative Republican coalition, fiscally conservative, almost libertarian on social issues, well, that's not going to sit well with the many voters of the religious right. Even if that is the new face of Republicanism, I don't believe that our electorate wants to head in that direction. Of all the candidates this year, Ron Paul came closest to the model, and his results in the primaries were dismal.
The wheels are coming off the old Republican coalition, and I could not me more pleased! I'm looking forward to many years of fiscally responsible, socially responsible governance from the Democrats.
So there are my opinions on the subject - not some self-proclaimed "truth," just considered opinions. Feel free to disagree - only time will tell!
I believe that we need to keep the electorate focused on the November elections. Another impeachment trial would not help us to do this.
Also, our incumbent Democratic Representatives and Senators need to be out campaigning. Tying them up in impeachment proceedings, while their Republican opponents are free to campaign, does not seem like a wise choice. Of course, it will also tie up some of the Republican incumbents, but not to the same degree as those Democrats pressing the charges.
Impeachment is an pretty ugly process and does a lot to destroy the public's faith in government. Letting the public do the deciding builds faith in our government. Therefore, I favor letting the electorate take care of the problem in November.
Also, suppose that by some freak happenstance the impeachment were to succeed. I really don't want Dick Cheney to be President, even for one minute.
"But hey, we had two candidates who were both making history, two candidates that, if either were to win, would be making history."
Would anyone mind if I amend that to two GREAT candidates. Truth be told, when one adds in the other great contenders - Richardson, Dodd, Edwards, etc. - we Dems have, as the Brits put it, "Been spoilt for choice!"