But, the more Clinton hold-outs see what Republicans really think of their candidate (and them and their beliefs by extension), the more likely they are to come around to supporting the Democratic ticket. We had a tough primary fight, but I can't imagine most of us (Obama supporters) really dislike or hate Hillary or her supporters. But Republicans do. They always have and always will. And as much as they want to poach those voters, they just can't seem to hide their anti-Hillary venom.
I honestly think she's better than he is. Her speaking is just as strong, but also more personal. It's what's sometimes missing from Barack's speeches and, perhaps, why some haven't connected with him.
I don't dispute the power of being chair of the Judiciary Committee.
I dispute that it was Biden's job to trash someone just because he was nominated by a Republican, or that he is any more responsible than the Democrats who voted IN FAVOR of Thomas. Had they not done so, he wouldn't have been confirmed, no matter what happened in that committee.
I also dispute that Biden is responsible for the Thomas tenure on the court, as his defeat would have led to another nominee, just the same in his approach to the Constitution, but without the convenience of sexual allegations to disrupt his appointment process.
I've thought quite a bit about race and sex in this campaign. Of course, it would be great to live in an America where women and minority candidates win (or lose!) based on whether they deserved to, and not because of sex or skin color (or religion, or sexuality...you get the gist).
But of course, we do not live there yet, and for women and minorities to break barriers there must be voters BECAUSE of skin color and sex to counter those AGAINST skin color and sex.
I initially resisted the identity voting. I found Obama suited in unique ways to the office of the President, but didn't really consider "being black" very high among them. Oh, I thought it good that, with his election, one barrier would be broken, but it wasn't the reason for my support.
Perhaps it should have been.
Well, not THE reason, but an important one. The best way to overcome sexism and racism isn't to simply say "it's wrong" or to point to the evidence of female and minority ability, but to CRUSH it with an example that cannot be ignored. A female or minority President would do just that.
I mean...we "elected" a guy because of his last name...surely a competent politician/leader who happens to be black or female is a far more justifiable position that family name.
Agree especially with #1. I don't mind a little mud slinging, but McCain's ads are just out and out lies.
This is also a chance (w/ #1) to pay homage to the Clinton legacy. We can talk about Obama's plan which would cut taxes for the VAST majority of Americans. We don't have to talk about taxing the rich...it can be phrased as "America has done a lot for you, but now many Americans need YOUR help." It may not play well with the trust fund crowd, but the theme of sacrifice is a strong one that will play well with those blue collar workers whose entire lives are deciding how much to sacrifice for healthcare, or for college savings, or for any number of other things. We can discuss returning sanity to our tax code to what it was under Bill Clinton, when the economy was strong and the budget was balanced. THIS IS OUR ISSUE AND WE MUST OWN IT!
Agreed. We've led the GOP get away with portraying themselves as the tax-cutters for far too long, but if they had their way every middle class family in America would have to pay MUCH more for the things government can provide.
It's a regressive system and should be touted as such.
We might begin..."Do you and your family have an extra $10,000 lying around?"
95% of the voters we need to target will say "HELL NO!" But the costs of insuring a family, plus the costs of the ridiculous deductibles that go along with market based insurance...well, it adds up to a LOT more than it does when you have employer based health insurance or, better yet, a government (and God willing in the future, a single payer) system for health care coverage.
Hmm...it seemed to me that there was a fairly broad consensus among the media that it wasn't going to be Hillary.
Some speculation of her as a surprise pick, but it was always baseless. I agree that perhaps an announcement could have been made earlier, but that would have led to..."Wait...Hillary's a 'No', but Kaine is still on the list?"
Some are understandably disappointed. Some are rabble rousers, who had pledged to vote against Obama no matter what, even if he chose Hillary.
For those who are disappointed, we need to show them why this ticket is a good one based on Hillary's positions and America's needs.
Those who are just causing trouble need to be ignored.
Oh, I agree. I didn't say it was smart...I just don't think it's the mean spirited remark as construed. Some people deal with tension with humor...but perhaps this situation isn't yet to the point that such humor can be taken as such.
Yeah, that's kind of my take. I'm not the type to make those mildly insulting jokes with someone I don't know, but a lot of people are. Same way a person might make a comment if you're wearing a university t-shirt that differs from their favorite, or something like that.