I'm Not Naive

Lots of diaries tonight talking about what Senator Clinton said today.  Lots of supporters on both sides taking issue with the other's conclusions.  I think we can all agree on a few things:

1.  Hillary Clinton is an extremely smart person.

2.  She is a tireless, disciplined campaigner.

3.  She is extremely good at staying on message, choosing her words carefully for best effect.

and 4.  If history is a guide, she never "just says something." 

Given these four characteristics, I can draw only one conclusion about her rationale for the statement she made today.  I'm not naive.  If you're interested, follow me over the jump.

There's more...

Okay, I'll Tell You What Is (and What Is Not) Allowed

A prominent and regular diarist currently sits atop the Recommended list.  She wants to know what's allowed as we approach the denouement of the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination.

She won't respond to answers in her own diary, so this diary is intended as a primer on what is, and what is not, allowed.  And by the way, I'm following her lead in using the word allowed: I don't get to make any rules; I'm speaking only as one Obama supporter with almost six years of experience at MyDD about what I believe diarists and posters should and should not do.

Update [2008-5-20 13:38:41 by deminva]: I've added MATTW's rules from his comment below. I changed their numbering to have a single list; his rules start after my final rule.

[Update 2] Thanks to everyone who has suggested other rules. Just to be clear, I envision these rules as no more than guidelines for what diarists and posters should and should not do if they wish to be valued and respected members of this community. If you have any constructive feedback for me, please provide it.

Some posters have taken exception to my habit of offering examples that are uniformly critical of Clinton and/or her supporters. I did so on purpose, in part because I wanted to tacitly invite Clinton supporters to "follow" my "rules" by offering substantive counterarguments to any of my examples. If anyone cares to offer examples that illustrate shortcomings of Obama supporters, by all means do so. Some posters have generally rebutted me by saying that all facts are interpretations. Without getting too deep, I disagree. For example, Obama won the Virginia primary and in it the white vote. Those are facts, and unless you want to take exception to how we define winning a primary or how voters define their race, they aren't subject to interpretation. Similarly, Clinton said in October that the MI primary wouldn't count. That's a fact. You can go to Youtube and listen to her say it. Now, I believe that the most reasonable interpretation for why she made the statement is that she wanted to justify to the voters of NH why she was keeping her name on the MI ballot, her point being that NH voters had no reason to think that she was showing their first-in-the-nation primary any disrespect by staying on the MI ballot. But whatever her rationale for saying it, it's a settled fact: Clinton stated that the MI primary wouldn't count.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads