The Democrats' dilemma: The people back Barack but Hillary backs Hillary

[babylonsister]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/13401

The Democrats' dilemma: The people back Barack but Hillary backs Hillary
by Alan Bisbort | March 13, 2008


The Democratic Party faces a major dilemma in the 2008 election, one that needs to be resolved sooner rather than later.

That is, supporters of Hillary Clinton and supporters of Barack Obama have different emotional attachments to their candidates. The emotional attachment to Sen. Obama feels much deeper to me than it does for Sen. Clinton. She represents another family dynasty of insider politicos who seem hellbent on selling us down the river. Though it's fair to argue about the differences in "experience" between the two candidates, the fact remains that Clinton does not engender hope the way Obama does.

snip//

When and if Hillary Clinton finds a backroom way to pry the nomination loose from Barack Obama's hands, there will be hell to pay. This is a real and present dilemma. If Clinton supporters deny this they are delusional or willfully dense. While either Obama or Clinton could beat John McCain in November, the backlash from a snake-in-the-grass Clintonian power grab would be enough to undo much of the energy and excitement brought to the Democratic Party by Obama's run.

After eking out victories in the Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island primaries last week, the Clintonian "Comeback Kid" meme was pulled out of mothballs. Never mind that she gained all of nine delegates in the three wins (and even that nine is "soft") and that Obama then won the Wyoming caucus handily. Never mind that Obama still holds a virtually insurmountable lead in delegates. Displaying more gall than even her husband has, Hillary Clinton still insisted that she would gladly share the ticket with the senator from Illinois, the implication being that Obama would be her VP, her water carrier.

Perhaps it would have been out of character for Obama, but many would have welcomed him saying, "Sen. Clinton, I am not your White Houseboy." Indeed, millions of Americans on whose faces the White House doors have long been shut can taste the sweetness of an Obama victory. Anything less will leave a bitter, perhaps even unbearable, aftertaste.
_______

[Saturday]

1. Right, the millions of people that back Barack are people ....

and the millions that back Hillary are less than people. Only Hillary backs Hillary. Ridiculous article.

[msongs]

2. talk about race baiting commentary...."I am not your white houseboy"... is this guy the

geraldine ferraro of the obama camp?

Msongs

[babylonsister]

3. Lots of people thought that was the intent of

the Clinton camp-to offer the leading candidate the VP seat? Pretty condescending imo.

[Rydz777]

4. Wow! This guy Bisbort has developed an "emotional

attachment" meter that permits him to psyche out millions of voters. Let no one say that American inventiveness is dead.

[babylonsister]

5. It's fairly obvious to anyone who's paying attention, especially if

you're reading here, that there are emotional attachments to these candidates. And I doubt millions of voters read Bisbort. ;)

[OhioChick]

6. K&R

:kick:

[JimGinPA]

7. K&R

[metalluk]

8. Rational attachment is more important

"The emotional attachment to Sen. Obama feels much deeper to me than it does for Sen. Clinton."

The emotional attachment to Obama may be stronger, precisely because he has designed his campaign around appeals to emotion. Clinton supporters are more likely to be those who evaluate candidates rationally, looking for real evidence of who would, in fact, accomplish more for America. Clinton is the one with solid, concrete proposals for dealing with America's major problems. Obama offers vague appeals to "hope" and "change" but little more. I am glad that Clinton does not merely engender hope, standing instead for gritty determination, hard work, and creative and real solutions to America's problems.

Clinton acquired her experience by being part of the most successful Democratic administration of the last forty years -- the only successful one, in fact.

"the backlash"

There will be backlash either way. Many Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama because of his appalling lack of experience. If Clinton wins the nomination, it will have been by some fair process. It's only your bias that makes it seem like a "snake in the grass."

"After eking out victories in the Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island"

Your bias is showing again. Her victories in Ohio and Rhode Island were by substantial margins. Only the Texas victory was narrow. She will likely win PA by a commanding margin, which may then produce momentum that will carry over into other primaries. Obama is consistently losing to Hillary among working class whites, the elderly, women, Catholics, Latinos, and Jews. He is being propped up by just two constituencies: the youth vote and the black votes. As this becomes increasingly evident, the tide and the Party may yet turn to Clinton. I certainly hope so.

[AtomicKitten]

9. I just sent an emotional $100 to Barack.

K&R

[Cha]

11. Sweet..he'll get a lot of those, no doubt.

[Scurrilous]

10. K & R

:thumbsup: