I am sad about what we "could" have had

[SoCalDem]

Had hubris and raw lust for power not entered into the plan, we could have had the most unified party, and at just the right time.

Bill Clinton left office still popular, his wife went on the be a US senator.... and was easily re-elected. She had won over the most die-hard upper New York conservatives. Almost everyone had good things to say about her as a senator...

For seven and a half years she coyly rebuffed suggestions that she was really just preparing for her own run for the presidency. We all pretty much knew what she had planned... . or was it even HER plan? Was it Bill's plan FOR her? Perhaps as a gesture of contrition for all he has put her though?

HE is the great campaigner..the schmoozer who can talk for hours, sans notes. He's the one with the BIG personality.. Could it have been a way for him to revive his own presidency, and live vicariously though her?

Don't get me wrong... she's a very intelligent woman, and has gotten high marks for her senate tenure, but she also is a controversy magnet, and has extremely high negatives. They may be unfairly attributed to her, but she WAS half of the famous "two for the price of one" team, and she had her own share of bad press and difficulties.

Perhaps they thought that Bill's charisma would automatically transfer to her if she ran. Early on, I sensed that it was not going to happen, and maybe Bill saw it too..That sense of "what do we do now?" might have been what led him (and others) to make rash comments here and there...to plant little seeds of doubt about the worthiness of the person who shocked them all, and became the front runner..

The fact that he was an African-American man, very much LIKE Bill was impossible to miss. Bill Clinton, the so-called "first Black president", who had excellent relationships in one of the most faithfully democratic communities, found himself at a crossroads.. "Burn every bridge" , in order to lessen Obama's appeal, and risk angering the very people he has had such an affinity for for decades, or cede them over to the first really electable African American candidate.. He chose option #1 and got both in return, AND falling popularity for himself.

the pictures we should have/could have seen on the campaign trail look like this:




Obama's campaign could have been the crowning glory for Bill and Hillary.. The older , wiser First Couple, shepherding the next generation.. The culmination of Martin Luther King's dream, and with their help, a bringing together of young, old, male, female, white, black.. A HUGE coalition that could have endured.. I could even see Bill becoming Sec of State and Hillary , senate majority leader (lord knows Reid is not cutting it)..


And instead .... we have acrimony and pictures like this.. and almost daily "apologies"..and older white women vs almost everyone , and African Americans turning away from the man they trusted and loved for many years..and they all just look totally "tapped out".. and angry



This is how we kill dreams..

[babylonsister]

1. Good, but sad, post.

Spot on, imo. And that last picture! I'd never seen that! :wow:

[crud76]

89. No, just sad

Can't the Obamatons get it through their skulls that most R's will not vote for a black man, and many closet racist D's (and there are a lot more than some people care to admit) won't either? They're sacrificing the party to go gaga over someone with a good rap but no plan. Let's just quit now and tell McCain it's all his.

[butterfly77]

105. Can't the people for Hillary get it in their heads...

that a lot of people hate Hillary and now a large majority of the black population says they will never vote for her now...

[SoCalDem]

106. AND, this might have been the "last straw" for many of them

for the democratic party.. They have faithfully hung in there for decades, and been promised so much..and had very little delivered. I'm guessing that the republican party is already figuring out a way to lure them into that smelly old republican "big tent" they always brag about.

Republicans are no longer "in love" with the radical bible-thumpers, and are eagerly looking for a more mainstream replacement for them as part of the base.. I can really see them going after African Americans..in a big way..

You can only hope for just so long, before you just say "to hell with it", and try something completely different. This campaign season proved to them that the one guy they pinned their hopes to for so long, just wasn't that "into them", and was ready to throw them under the bus, if it helped his wife..

[jbm]

136. self-delete

.

[Submariner]

2. The Lust for power has got to be a mighty aphrodisiac

when one has been working towards it for the last 35 years.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DWilliamsamh]

87. Thanks Rev. Hagee!

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Oleladylib]

3. Oh please..she's not babysitting him...she's challenging him for the nomination..

[The Stranger]

7. She's not challenging him -- she LOST the nomination.

[Oleladylib]

9. naw,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[The Stranger]

4. Post of the year.

Democratic President -- we hardly knew ya.

[Slagathor]

5. You don't know politics very well, do you?

It doesn't matter which one wins. The other will fall into line and campaign aggressively for a Democrat win. Even if Hillary gets in, Obama is too valuable a speaker to be relegated to the could've would've file. And the big dog, as psychotic as it may seem, will most certainly campaign for Obama. Hillary too if the truth be told. This is just politics. You shouldn't take it so personally. They certainly don't.

[JohnnyLib2]

12. That's been true historically, and many of us are hoping it still is.

But right now you have far more confidence than I do on current politics.

[Slagathor]

15. This is no nastier than any number of historical races

If anything, it's been periodically more classy than some. It just alternates between the two modes so frequently that it appears nastier than it really is. The candidates have, for the most part, been pretty well behaved.

[JohnnyLib2]

24. I've come to think that "cyber=bullying" is the cart driving the

horse, so to speak. Examples are everywhere, from all sides. That's part of my concern about the fallout in November and beyond. :shrug:

[Armstead]

90. Obama has been well behaved -- Hillary has brought out the kinves

Edwards was my first choice, and I got a glimpse of what we were in for when Hillary tried to shoot him down in debate by saying his populist liberal message was "mudslinging right out of the GOP playbook."

She has done everything to muddy the waters ever since.

[SoCalDem]

17. and it's one thing to bicker with each other over policy or votes

This stuff is personal and nasty..and it leaves deep wounds.. Not all wounds heal..

And when tens of thousands of new people are signing on, the cynicism of pairing with people who have played "dirty", has the same effect on them, and when McCain hugged & kissed Bush.. It turns them OFF..

[OhioBlue]

26. there is much more to it

than just the candidates showing support for each other.

what could have been.......

[SoCalDem]

32. That seems to be our lot in life, doesn't it?

JFK..
LBJ's stubbornness stopped the completion of the Great Society (which DID include health care)
MLK
Bobby
the possibility of JFK,jr.

Is it any wonder we are called dreamers? They are all we seem to actually end up with. Dreams morphed into nightmares, and back to dreams as time passes..

and we always wake up and see

Nixon
Reagan
Bush1
Bush2

[OhioBlue]

34. Oh SCD!

You made me cry. I mean, really, I'm gonna have a hard time keeping the water works off. I had a lump in my throat all day yesterday. The Ferraro comments really brought everything together for me. I've been disappointed or upset with the Clinton campaign before. But, OMG... they have gone to a place that makes me want to weep for them, for us.

It could have been such a wonderful campaign, leading to such a wonderful Presidency, Bill's legacy in place and Hillary as a respected political figure in her own right.

[SoCalDem]

37. Yep.. we get close..but..

oh well.. we'll muddle through.. It's too late to undo it, so we can only trudge forward and hope for the best:)

sorry I made you weepy :)

I just hate to see us eating our own :(

I still have hope..

I wrote this a while back.. (in case you missed it)

................................................................
Has the torch been passed? I am getting hopeful here..

Posted by SoCalDem in General Discussion
Tue Feb 12th 2008, 04:33 PM

That said, I am a white 58 year old woman, so maybe I am missing something.

I saw it with my own kids, but I attributed it to the color-blind upbringing we gave them..

My youngest son's first real girlfriend was a young girl with a Black Mother and a Japanese Dad.. In May he is marrying a girl whose Father was born in Mexico and who picked cotton as a young man in the San Joaquin Valley. His future mother in law did not learn English until she was a teenager.


All I see in the "parsing" of politics, is the "groups" and who they support, or who they do not support.

Some people (there's that phrase again ..) say that white men will not vote for a black man or that Hispanic people will not vote for a black person or that "older women" will only vote for this one or that one.

If what we are seeing is what I think we are seeing, just maybe people have moved beyond that narrowminded groupthink.

There will always be a hardcore bigoted bunch of yahoos scattered here and there who will not see what is happening, but for the most part, I think we may be getting somewhere.

What made it happen?

I hate to think this might be it, but it just MAY be sports..

Think about it..

Kids idolize sports people..no matter what color they are..no matter what language they speak, no matter where they were born..

Young kids play on sports teams with kids of every ethnic group.

Technically, school integration started the ball rolling, but until kids accepted each other as true equals (often as teammates who counted on each other to win games), there was still resistance.

When kids play together and make friends, they hang out together, their parents sit on the sidelines and cheer for each other's kids..

They shop together, they travel together, meet each other's families...and once the "otherness" barriers come down, they date and marry each other.

A natural consequence of this is the fact that MANY white people of my age group have mixed-race grandchildren. It takes a cold hearted person to continue to hate and fear, when they transfer those feelings to THEIR grand children and sons & daughters-in-law.

When people only think ONE way for a long time, it's hard to see a gradual change, but I find it deliciously ironic, that those little kids who had to have the military to help them even get inside of a "white school" were just the bud, of a flower that seems to be in full bloom...

I'm happy to be around to see it..no matter how much "fertilizer" it took to grow that thing






Read entry | Discuss (36 comments) | Recommend (9 votes) | Remove from Journal | Add/Edit Intro

[bvar22]

70. Yes. We all remember how aggressively Bill & Hill campaigned for Kerry in 04.

Oh wait....No they didn't.


My bad.

[SoCalDem]

72. and joined in on the undermining of him

:(

[KoKo]

88. I still say...the only way out of this mess is making them the "Unity" Ticket...

There are many who say NO WAY...including Pelosi...but the rancor out there means the only way we can win in November is to have the "Unity" Ticket.

There's much more about Hillary and Obama that will be revealed once the Repug Ops get themselves in full gear. They can withstand the attacks better together than alone. I don't want to see the youth vote crushed if Obama doesn't make it and I don't want to see the Hillary voters angry if she goes down. We don't need to be fighting the 60's again...and that's what the Repugs want. I don't think either candidate by themselves can stand up to the Repugs...but together we out here could push them as unified Dems that they have to be held accountable to.

I'm for Al Gore...sigh...but these two are what we are left with. They each have strong support in the Dem Party. They need to fight for us together. Or....we will have McCain. The Powers that Be are already working us for McCain.

my 2 cents..anyway.

[SoCalDem]

100. We might end up with one, but I still see issues with it

Any ticket with HRC on in comes with an extra feature of having Bill Clinton attached to it.

If she's the #1, he's the "first spouse" and BHO becomes that 6th toe..not necessary and usually "cut off"..

The economic condition of the country is so dire, that I could see her as a one termer, and followed by a republican in 2012...not McCain ..someone younger and probably meaner..

Meaner, because after a "troubled" 1st term, she would be a republican-energizer to the nth degree, and that's when the real ideologues come out of the woodwork..

By the time 2016 rolled around, BHO would just be "that black guy who was HRC's veep for 4 years", and probably not even holding public office by then..

...........................

If BHO is the #1, Bill Clinton is still in the picture as HRC's personal advisor.. Could BHO really ever trust her, after the underhanded things that her people have done so far, and are yet to do? The elevation of the vice presidency a la Cheney, might appeal to HRC, and I can see her pushing this agenda every time a press person is nearby..sublty, of course, but she's good at the passive-aggressive style that it would take, to "gently undermine" his adminsitration from within, while bolstering her own reputation...

.........................

While a unity ticket might be the bandaid that some people want, in order to run against McCain, the hardened positions of both camps, almost doom its success..Her people would see vp as a loss..as would his..

All you have to do is to look at little kids' sports to see the problem.. Soccer/baseball/peewee football Tournaments always have awards ceremonies afterward..

Most people are not that eager to go to the 2nd place awards ceremonies..(other than parents of the little kids who "won" 2nd place)

The "fuss" is for the ones who were #1...not #2

............

I had high hopes for Al too, but we had our chance to have him as president, and we all missed out..There's a Kismet nuance to presidential politics..His moment passed, and now we have another chance..It may pass as well:(

[flor de jasmim]

6. The top group of pictures is super...to be fair to Hillary...

there have been some BEAUTIFUL pictures of her on the campaign trail, but I agree with your main point.

[rug]

8. Not quite as dramatic. It's become more like a race for HS class president.

From the namecalling on down.

And it's not onesided.

[susankh4]

19. No it is not one sided...

and we could have been in for 16 years of Dem rule, had Mr. Obama accepted the tutelege of the Clintons.

Now... we'll probably get *0* years. None.

Instead, our party is mired in a race war.

A very sad moment.....

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[reflection]

80. You may be right about the 0 years part,

(I hope not, though)

but I don't think it was incumbent upon Obama to accept any "tutelage" from the Clintons.

BC certainly had a good run, but HRC has run a perfectly horrible campaign. Obama should be eating her dust by now. Of course you have to give him credit as well. But it really a shame. A collision of two of the most dynamic forces to grace the Democratic party in a long time, and this mess has resulted. I hope the candidate that emerges is not fatally wounded, politically.

[Independent-Voter]

118. Yeah - Obama is all "uppity". What the hell was he thinking messing up HRC's coronation?

[tabatha]

10. This is a good article.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/840277,CST-NWS-mitch13.article

[SoCalDem]

14. That is a good article.. thanks

:hi:

[JohnnyLib2]

11. Can you hear my deep, sad sigh?

Your post, especially the pictures, just confirm the sense of going backward when we could be going forward. EOM.

[tishaLA]

38. Yes. I breathed it myself.

[susankh4]

13. Very sad day it is....

my dream of a unified ticket... now gone. Burned to ashes.

And, to think, what we could have had!

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

[Apollo11]

16. I prefer this photo

[SoCalDem]

18. Thanks.. I'll add that one

:)

[Apollo11]

23. I found some more happy "dream team" photos

Posted them a while back:
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4899922

[progressoid]

20. They'll bury the hatchet when the time comes.

At least publicly.

[SoCalDem]

27. True..but this way there IS a loser.. There could have been ALL winners

millions of dollars spent going after McCain, instead of each other, and a coming together,instead of splitting apart:(

[progressoid]

53. Yeah, and sadly, we've done a lot of the dirty work for the Repubs.

On a positive note. November is a long way off and Americans don't have very long attention spans so this will all be a fuzzy memory for most of the voting public. Plus they'll be distracted by the next American Idol or TMZ or...errr...ummm....wait, this was supposed to be a positive note. Damn.

[tridim]

30. I think so too

This thing is far from over. I'm certainly not giving up.

Our side has fight, the GOP has nothing.

[K Gardner]

21. "I Dreamed a Dream in Days Gone By, When Hope Was High ...Now Life

has Killed the Dream I Dreamed" (Les Miserables)

Sad and poignant post, albeit true. Bookmarked.

[here_is_to_hope]

22. Excellent post, thank you for this....

Its sad, isnt it?

[SoCalDem]

25. and can you imagine the financial support that combination would have garnered?

Mc Cain would have been steamrollered and might not have even won Arizona..:evilgrin:

[Window]

28. Nice post, but sad.

[Divernan]

29. Very insightful post.

One of the saddest aspects of this brutal primary is the damage the Clintons have done to their legacies as former president and first lady/spouse. Jimmy Carter is the gold standard for behavior of a former president.

Contrast the one picture of Hillary in the OP, with the age appropriate face, sans $1000 make up job & botox, and how she looks in the debates. A little makeup for the camera - OK, but looking young enough to be your own grand daughter? HRC sells out to the shallow, sexist values of the American Idol society. Nancy Pelosi didn't need to do that to gain respect and high political office. Neither did Angela Merkel, Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi or Margaret Thatcher. With her pasted on smile, and reliance on her husband's name to open doors and checkbooks, HRC reminds me more of Imelda Marcos, than the strong and independent female heads of state elected in both first and third world countries.

[Submariner]

35. If she could have entered the race as Hillary Rodham

and not ever have had the Clinton name, and the subsequent anchor around her neck, then the race between the first woman and black man running for president, now on a level playing field, without a huge political (Clinton) machine whirring in the background, could have been a great event, especially if the racism was left out (Hey...I can dream can't I?).

[Beacool]

36. You're off the mark.

I know Hillary and have even had her arm around me while taking photos. Hillary in person does NOT look like the woman on the pic on the right, that's just one lousy picture. We all have had them.

Hillary up close is quite lovely. She does have the normal complexion of a 60 year old person who hasn't had plastic surgery, but she has beautiful big blue eyes with long eyelashes that seldom show in pics. She also has a megawatt smile, a great sense of humor and she laughs easily.

[Beacool]

31. What we could have had?

We could have had two great presidents: the first woman president and then the first African-American to achieve the position.

Instead, we have a divided party. Why? Because a guy who had barely dropped his bags on the senate floor two years past, decided that he too should run for president in 2008. I would have gladly campaigned for Obama if he had stayed in the senate long enough to build a resume. He's a bright man, a talented and gifted speaker, but I don't think that he's prepared to be president.

Therefore, if Hillary is not also on the ticket, I will not vote for him. I have agonized about not voting for a Democrat for the first time in my life, but I have made my decision.

:shrug:

[KittyWampus]

40. So Queen Hillary really WAS supposed to run unopposed in your view? How DARE anyone challenge her?

And challenge her to the point that Hillary's sad, pathetic campaign fell apart and lost and yet decides to battle on even though the fight is futile?

[TwilightGardener]

41. Obama had every right to offer himself for President--it was NO ONE'S "turn"--

if most people agreed with you, he would have lost and dropped out a long time ago. Instead, most states compared the two, and chose him. YOU might not think he's ready, but many more do--blame the voters who voted for him (myself included)--NOT him. He saw an opportunity, and went for it.

[Bigleaf]

59. Oh come on! The entiltlement argument at it's finest. So she's entitled? A coronation perhaps?

Long live the next in line, Queen Hillary? Is that how you think this should work?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

71. Obama has more legislative experience than Hillary.

[rambler_american]

82. Good Idea.

Even HRC has said that McCain is more qualified to be president than Obama. :sarcasm: So don't vote or if you insist, vote for St John. Me? I will vote for whomever the Dems nominate. My first, second and third choices are no longer running, but I will do everything I can to keep the repugs from keeping the WH. Don't understand why that's not important, but you do whatever you need to.

[Rockholm]

84. BINGO!!!!!!

[DFW]

98. I would beg you to reconsider that decision

I don't know Hillary (or Obama, for that matter) well, but I, too,
have the photos with us with our arms around each other. Despite
Obama's apparent lack of a presidential resumé, he is still a very
forceful man in person, and if he gets the right people on board with
him, if nominated and elected, he could still turn out fine.

At any rate, two things are for sure: during the next four years, the
next president will nominate a new Supreme Court Justice. If it's
McCain, he has already said he will nominate guys like Roberts and
Alito, who, in every decision, have voted against the rights of the
individual against the State or corporation. Obama, if elected, would
nominate a Justice who would rule in the opposite way. These Justices
are there for life. If another Alito gets on the SCOTUS, you don't get
a second chance in 4 years. We don't have the option of NOT voting
the Democratic ticket unless that matter is of secondary nature. To me,
anyway it is not, and I don't even spend a lot of my time back home
in North America anymore. But it is still home. I will be back living
there some day, and I care enough to vote Democratic, even if "my"
candidate will never be the nominee. There are issues bigger than my
preferences at stake here.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

126. Hillary barely dropped her bags in NY before becoming Senator.

[SoCalDem]

129. She acted on HER Kismet moment without hesitation

but, some here criticize HIm for doing the same..

Had she had to remove a sitting senator from office, I think she would have lost..

Notice that she did not choose to run from another of her "home states"..

She did not seek the Arkansas senate seat or the Illinois seat or the Pennsylvania seat...and those were all places she actually had lived in.

Bill could have set up his offices anywhere..

[Divernan]

135. Hillary carpetbagged NY Congresswoman Nita Lowey

Lowey had served in Congress since 1988 and was all set to run for the US Senate in 1990, until HRC shoved her out of the way. Lowey had TWELVE YEARS experience in the US House and is/was a native New Yorker. Hillary didn't want to wait her turn. Hillary could have run for Lowey's seat when Lowey ran for the Senate. HRC and her supporters are great at the "Do as I say, not as I do" approach to fairplay.

[sfam]

131. I wouldn't be surprised if this is a widely shared view, regardless how much I disagree...

There really is a sense among Hillary supporters that she is somehow entitled to the position - that because she has more experience that somehow this challenger is somehow stealing something rightfully hers. But if this were true, why didn't we all vote for Joe Biden? He was BY FAR the most experienced of the class of potentials.

So the argument, while perhaps a shared feeling, really doesn't have any logic behind it from where I sit. I suspect it has more to do with many older women sensing a real chance for the first time in their lives, who also now see it slipping away for reasons they don't understand.

But that said, I agree that if McCain chooses a woman on the ticket and Obama does not take Hillary, I see real trouble heading our way. While I think Hillary would be a pretty bad candidate on the ticket in many ways (primarily for attracting the independents and muddying Obama's main appeal of breaking with the politics of the past), I think it makes a lot of sense for him to offer Hillary a spot. This may be the only way to bring the party back together.

But this gets less likely with each passing day. Unless the two candidates can both "see sense" very quickly and end the bloodletting, this idea will be untenable. Obama may still have to choose a woman, but Hillary won't be it if the whole kitchen sink strategy keeps on keeping on.

[blm]

33. Thoughtful post. Not to mention how Gore and Kerry were undermined for that goal

Images that NEVER should have happened. Bush2's swearing in 2001 and 2005.

ANY Dem joining BushInc for a smear:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk1k0nUWEQg

[TwilightGardener]

39. I will never forgive Hillary for turning what was an exciting, inspiring

contest two months ago, when Democrats likes both candidates so much it was hard to choose just one, into a shitfest that crystallized hard feelings against both of them, and tore the healing wounds of race and gender wide open again--all in her lust to win. What won't this woman do for power? Seriously, I ask all Hillary supporters to please tell me which line she won't cross to gain an advantage over Obama--and why would you support someone who needs power that badly? Someone like that should not be allowed to have it, because she's clearly not acting for the good of the party and the country, and she won't USE that power for the good of the party and the country--she's going to be a Democratic Bush/Cheney.

[Beacool]

56. And I will never forgive Obama for ruining it for Hillary.

:shrug:

[TwilightGardener]

60. LOL! It was the VOTERS who "ruined" it for Hillary--and Hillary herself who

ruined it for Hillary. If she was a better candidate, she would have run away with it, with all of her huge political advantages and name recognition.

[Beacool]

62. Keep laughing, let's see if you're still laughing in November. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

64. Ooohhh, an ominous threat. Skeery!

[DWilliamsamh]

93. Bitter, party of one! Bitter, party of one?

Having "Hell hath no fury" moment, are we?

[SoCalDem]

74. Yep.. Most people didn't even know who he WAS, until after Iowa

we've ALL known her since 1992..and most people thought she would run away with it..All of 2007, she was the presumed winner..until she started her national campaign..

[susankh4]

97. I'm with you on that!

Nor will I forgive the Dem party for ruining our chances at 16 years in the White house.

[JerseygirlCT]

111. By having the gall to run?

He hasn't ruined it for Hillary. She's ruined it for herself, with the help of her husband.

[SoCalDem]

112. Sadly, there are many people who see him as "uppity" and not willing to wait his "turn"

Like Kennedy was ... Like Bill Clinton was..

ANY time a "young" person dares to challenge an "elder" who has "earned it", and whose "turn" it is, there is always a segment of the population who fails to realize that time always goes FORWARD, and even though an elder may have "earned" it as they waited patiently for their turn, they don't just get it handed to them for waiting their turn..

Sometimes people wait too long, and they no longer fit the job.and sometimes younger people feel the pulse of upcoming changes better than an older one who only has the past in his/her resume, and has little feel for the future.

HRC is not old, by modern standards, but she is very much a part of the past..
Fourteen years is a BIG difference in political years..

He was NO part of the Viet Nam era, or Watergate or the Civil Rights era, or Women's Lib era..


Both are living characters in our ongoing US history book, but she is the Epilogue for the 20th Century chapter.

He is the Prologue of the 21st Century chapter

[JerseygirlCT]

110. Yes. nt

[oasis]

42. Too bad Obama insisted on leapfrogging over someone he knew was better qualified.

He has shown himself to be a shallow opportunist.

[TwilightGardener]

44. Apparently he doesn't agree that she's better qualified. And 30 states

and voting districts agree with him, that she's not better qualified. You're acting as if he's winning in a vacuum--no, he's winning because he convinced people that he is a better choice. Blame the voters.

[oasis]

57. It's the starry eyed, emotionally charged, energetic groupies that got him this far. Not merit.

And of course, don't forget the role Oprah played in encouraging him i the first place.

[TwilightGardener]

58. Huh? How many "groupies" are there? You can't accept the

fact that a simple majority, of NORMAL EVERYDAY voters, simply thought Obama was a better choice. It's too painful for you, so you have to deploy the myth of the "cult", the latte-sipping college kids and activists, to help soothe and comfort yourself. Whatever gets you through the night. I saw lots of regular people--farmers, teachers, bank employees, etc.--at my caucus in Nebraska. Mostly middle-aged. Mostly supporting Obama. Your myth is busted.

[SoCalDem]

68. weinerdoggie..you're free to use my new "auto-reply"

[oasis]

69. Your time would be better spent on an analysis of Obama rather than on DU members.

You just might come up with a different conclusion about "His Greatness".:think:

[oviedodem]

48. How crass you are to say "it was not his turn" please tell me why??????????

[oasis]

55. I'll give him credit for a great speech, way back when, and not much else.(eom)

[sfam]

132. Are you speaking of Joe Biden? He was certainly the most qualified...

Oh, you're meaning someone else? Does this mean Hillary also leapfrogged someone who she knew was clearly better qualified?

[frogcycle]

140. you sayin he got uppity?

sounds like it

[barack the house]

43. They are quite powerful photos. We don't know his vp yet I'm guessing it's someone good.

[Vinca]

45. I heard one talking head say the Democrats could have put up

a tree stump to run against the Republicans this year and won, but instead will once again be grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. While we're feuding over who is racist and who is sexist, McCain is touring the world on the taxpayer's dime looking presidential. We are fools. At this point I can only hope a large dose of reality will hit both candidates so we might actually have a chance of winning in November.

[DemGa]

46. Me too -- had Obama stayed out

Now he's likely ruined both of their chances -- and caused permanent and severe damage to the Dems.

[oviedodem]

49. So he the whole reason for this??? Pathetic

[SoCalDem]

50. sorry.. not gonna "play"

but you have a nice day anyway :hi:

[DemGa]

51. I have no thought of you "playing" -- that's just how I see it

You have a nice day too.

[JohnnyLib2]

52. Well said, SoCalDem

Once again, it took only minutes for the partisanship to take over, from both direction. Sad, Sad.

[SoCalDem]

54. I just made this.. which will come in handy ..use it if you like

hotlink, if you want

[acmavm]

79. Why not? You started it. Why quit now? Why not explain why we

were all just supposed to jump on the Obama Band Wagon?

Remember he announced he wasn't going to run. Doesn't that mean that his word isn't worth a damn? He changed his mind so no one else was supposed to run. Everyone just drop out because the guy who's main claim to fame at that point was a great speech at the Democratic Convention.

You started this thread.

[DWilliamsamh]

96. Hillary said she wasn't goint to run as well. Is she a flip-flopper too?

[acmavm]

109. When did she say that?

[SoCalDem]

102. Yes, I "started" it

but thankfully there is no rule at DU that requires "thread-starters" to submit to cross-examination.:)

My thoughts were my own..Take them for what they are..or reject them.. It makes no difference to me. I am not required to participate in a circular argument with everyone who replies & disagrees, nor do I.:)

Thanks for reading & thinking about it though..

[acmavm]

108. You're welcome I think it's pretty much bullshit. And those are

MY thoughts. There will be no response from me.

[TwilightGardener]

61. Yes, Obama ran an uplifting, relatively clean and positive campaign, and

he's at fault for winning because of it, and despite the "kitchen sink" full of mud: Shame on you, Barack Obama!!

[DemGa]

63. Obama villified Hillary from the start -- hardly uplifting

[TwilightGardener]

65. Do I hear sirens? It sounds like the WAAAAHHHMbulance chugging up the street.

[DemGa]

67. Yes, they must be at your door by now---NT

[yellerpup]

47. The poignant truth.

Well done. K&R!

[SOS]

66. Excellent post

This has cascaded from exciting primary towards catastrophe.
Hate to say it, but this election cycle ended on 3/4/08.

Hopefully, in 2012, after 12 years of war and recession we'll have a chance.

[ClayZ]

73. Bravo! R R R R R R R R R and K

I wish I could Recommend this post ten times!

[Neshanic]

75. "This is how we kill dreams.." We sure did this time. Excellent post.

[SoCalDem]

77. Thanks.. n/t

[sueragingroz]

76. sadly.... that's politics.

[Catherina]

78. Very recommended n/t

[ramapo]

83. Sadly my idealism has been shattered also

It was early February and I felt so good about our party. I was proud. I had that natural high that comes ever so rarely from watching the political scene in America. Hillary or Barack, maybe Hillary and Barack.

But once again, I feel the fool for ever thinking that, "yes this might be the turning point", a thought I've foolishly harbored now and then over the decades.

Who knows how this will all turn out. Probably not for the best. Here's my prediction.

Hillary will continue her campaign of destruction, providing fodder for the Republican attack machine. The only good that can come out of this is Obama gets a taste of what is to come should he gain the nomination and figures out how to counter the attacks. Perhaps Obama responds in kind, spreading blood in the water.

The media is clearly now on the "get Obama" train. Again this might be for the best. We'll see if Obama can somehow counter the racial, religious, cultural, and "patriotic" blasts now exploding all around him.

Hillary might claw her way to the nomination. No way she can win the GE. She has a strong base of negatives, coupled with a significant number of pissed off Democrats, some who might just say screw it.

Barack might just hang on and win it. I believe he has some chance at beating McCain if he can counter the shitstorm that will be directed at him over the next seven plus months. McCain will sit back and run a "dignified" campaign, leaving the attacks to others.

Obama's only chance is to continue to run against the standard quo of politics as we know it while convincing the non-Obamaites that he is not some wimpy, black, terrorist-inspired plant who hates America and wants to turn it over to Muslim extremists who will kill our children and burn our churches. Good luck.

[noel711]

85. Gave up already?

Did Gandhi give up on his march to the sea?

Did Martin Luther King give up? Did the movement
give up even after his death?

Did the anti-war movement give up?

Did the wall in Berlin fall because the people were disheartened?

Why are we so easily defeated in the face of evil?

Do not give up in the face of evil...

Winston Churchill: Never, ever, ever give up.

[Armstead]

92. The difference is that Ghandi didn't keep hitting himself in the head with a hammer

That's what this primary has come down to.

[EmilyAnne]

86. Way too sad, but thanks for the post and the pics.

[Armstead]

91. Great and sad post

"What could have been"

I posted my own thoughts on this yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5056433&mesg_id=5056433

[meow mix]

94. good post. the old guard has stabbed thier own legacy in the back

very sad. trying to wreck the next gen and choosing a blind lust of power.

[fbuzz]

95. High Negatives? Dear, The Reagan, Clinton, and Bush, All Won With High Negatives

Mr. Pollyana ain't winning.

[metalluk]

99. Unity behind BO was never a possibility.

Many thoughtful voters like myself, who usually vote Democratic, would not have supported a candidate as inexperienced as BO, even if he had been endorsed by the Clintons early on. A freshman Senator with no major bills to his credit, with a half-dozen years as a part-time state legislator, some experience as a community organizer, and a dozen years as a law professor is not prepared for the Presidency of the world's most powerful nation, no matter what his color, racial mix, gender, etc. Add to that multiple indicators of questionable judgment and he presents a major gamble.

Some of the indicators of his poor judgment:
Runs a campaign based on emotional appeals and little in concrete proposals
Levels broad accusations against the establishment interests with whom he would need to work if elected
Links the rebuilding of America's economy and infrastructure to ending the War in Iraq
Smokes cigarettes and claims to have quit many times but without success due to lack of resolve
Belongs to a church with a racist doctrine (I'm not concerned about what Wright says or believes; I'm concerned about Obama not repudiating affiliation with a church that has a racist doctrine)
According to remarks made on two different occasions by two different aides, Obama's campaign positions don't necessarily represent his actual views or intended policies.

BO might someday have a level of experience and openness about his policy intentions that would justify enthusiastic support for him as a candidate for the Presidency or another major public office. He does not meet those requirements at present and it will become increasing evident to the American people, either during the remainder of the primary season or in the fall.

[SoCalDem]

101. You would not have voted for JFK either then?

By your criteria, I guess not..

[metalluk]

116. JFK was a bit underexperienced

but less so than BO. The result, when JFK was elected, was the Bay of Pigs, a fiasco of the first order, resulting from inexperience. It cost many lives.

[Armstead]

103. Comparing the management of the two campaigns, I'd say Obama is a far better leader

regarding some of your points:

He has concrete proposals to back his "emotional appeals." And, IMO, we need some emotional appeals to revitalize the political system and reduce the cynicism that has become so embedded.

he has been very even-keeled in his "attacks" on the establishment. And the establishment deserves "accusations."

I'd rather a president who smokes cigarettes than is addicted to using his bodily parts in the way President Clinton did.

The issue of the "two aides" is more a recognition of the complexity of issues.And if you don;t think Hillary has spent a lot of "quiet time" saying the same things to interest groups, then you are naive.

[metalluk]

115. Unfortunately, there is no evidence

that skill as a campaigner or as a speech-maker relates meaningfully to success as a President.

I have carefully read the speeches and policy positions of both candidates. On the economy, for example, very nearly all of Obama's proposals rehash proposals made by HRC first. The one unique aspect of his economic policy proposals, linking domestic initiatives to ending the war in Iraq, is utter folly. Decisions about when and when not to intervene or end a war have to be based on military, security and foreign policy objectives, not on the need to free-up money for domestic initiatives. Rebuilding the infrastructure, providing tax cuts, stimulating the economy -- those kinds of issues have to be based on domestic needs. Those two areas must not be pitted against one another, but Obama lacks experience with budgets, the economy, foreign affairs, and in many other areas, and will make mistakes based on inexperience over and over again, unless he first acquires a sensible level of understanding of the issues that confront America. A freshman Senator is not qualified by dint of charisma. It works in campaigns but not in office.

[Armstead]

119. Personally I wish he'd make bolder proposals but....

The fact is that the War in Iraq is draining the treasury and making it much more difficult to fund those other domestic initiatives. Even though budgeting, borrowing, etc. atre complex processes, there is a correlation there. Don't forget the impact the Vietnam War had on the economy for many years afterwards.

The "rehash" aspect shouldn't be a problem, if one agrees with Hillary. Personally, I think Hillary has been to tame in addressing the real issues of concentration of wealth and power, as is Obama. But having similar policies as Hillary is not an argument against his qualifications....There is no point in being different just for the sake of being different.

Thirdfy, one presumes that if Obama were to be elected, he would have access to the best brains that would be available to Hillary or any other president. No president goes into office knowing everything about everything.

Finally, on the comparison between campaigning and governing -- it does indicate a candidate's management skills. Obama found qualified people and has led them to accomplish something that has already been remarkable, by conducting a "ground game" that has organized and energized many people and has covered the minute details overall exceptionally well....By contrast, Hillary's campaign has been a mishmash and has been marked by infighting, short-sighted tactics and general ineffectiveness. Her only real successes have been as tossing out memes into the media that are muddying up Obama. So, even if she wins, one has to wonder how she will manage the task of convincing the nation to go along with whatever she proposes.

[metalluk]

137. The buck stops with the President

The idea that experience doesn't much matter because a President has access to the "best minds of the nation" may be comforting but it is also false for several reasons. The President is the one who ultimately chooses which "best minds" to draw upon in staffing his cabinet positions, chief-of-staff, directors, and other advisors. Bush had access to "all of the best minds" but selected the likes of Rumsfeld and Cheney. So, the privilege of being able to draw on talented individuals only serves a President in so far as he or she is able to draw upon their own judgment and EXPERIENCE to select wisely from the pool of candidates.

Secondly, men and women of talent, wisdom, and sound judgment often disagree on priorities and objectives. Suppose, for example, the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff believes in his best wisdom that the USAF badly needs a new kind of fighter jet in order to maintain its edge over an adversary that is posing a security threat, but the Budget Director believes that the cost would be too high and would interfere with more pressing domestic needs. Both of these advisors have strong arguments, backed up with impressive data and analysis. It's the President who has to weigh the various arguments and who must decide about relative priorities. The buck ultimately stops with the President.

As for the relative quality of the two campaigns, I agree that Obama has run a somewhat better campaign (up to this point), but you've overstated the extent of the difference. His advisors screwed up by suggesting that some of his statements had to be interpreted as campaign "positioning." Clinton's campaign had problems early on, but now it's rolling into high gear. But you are wrong about the quality of a campaign indicating anything about later competence as a President. After all, every President ran a campaign effective enough to win, but some went on to be great Presidents, some awful, and some mediocre. Campaigns, unfortunately, are mere popularity contests and the American populace is too easily taken in by charisma, expedient promises, looks, personality, and emotional appeals. And BTW, I'm not saying that Obama has exploited any of these more than other politicians, other than expressly designing his campaign around vague appeals to emotion, rather than issues.

I've chaired a couple of high-level executive searches and served on several other search committees. Search manuals advise committees to seek candidates with credentials that place them one natural step away from the level of the position you are trying to fill. For example, when looking for someone to be President of a large university, you typically look at candidates who are currently presidents at small schools or vice presidents at a comparable school. If the candidate is truly exceptional, you might consider an applicant who is roughly two steps removed from the level of responsibility they'd be assuming, such as a Dean or Associate Vice President from another University. It is usually folly to hire a person more than two steps below the level of responsibility of the open position. Obama, as a freshman Senator with minimal political experience, managerial experience, executive experience, or budgetary experience is several steps shy of the kind of experience needed for the Presidency.

Obviously, Obama supporters aren't about to be swayed by these kinds of reservations, but they really aren't doing either Obama or themselves any favors by pushing him forward at this time. If he loses big -- and he most likely will -- or fails to be successful in a first term -- also distinctly likely -- he'll be washed up politically by age fifty. If, instead, he had been encouraged to prepare himself with a reasonable level of experience, he would have a much greater chance of being a truly fine President 5-10 years hence. This current exercise in leap-frogging the man into a position of prominence before he's ready will likely be a huge waste of exceptional potential.

[SoCalDem]

138. Actually MOST of our presidents have been "unqualified"

It's not a job one can easily train for.

Truman didn't even know about the bomb until he became president

Eisenhower was a military guy, but if he had not had a post-war boom, I don't think he would have been all that successful

JFK was not all that ready either, but he grew into the job (post BoP)..had he lived longer, he might have not remained popular..no one knows how that would have turned out

LBJ was not a close confidante of JFK's and even his long career in politics did not make him successful

Nixon wanted to be president in the worst way.. and he succeeded

Ford was unprepared and it showed..but he too had a long legislative /government history

Carter may have been the best educated (prior to Clinton), and the smartest, but being governor of a southern state did not prepare him for the onslaught

Reagan's movie star days & union offices & even the governorship of California did not make him a good president.. the media did that for him

GHWB was probably the first vice president who was simultaneously the president (set the stage for Cheney) Smart and cunning, but not well-liked

Presidents cannot be all things to all people, no matter how smart they are..and no one is really "ready" until they have to do the job..

They all start out green, and either grow into it ..or don't..

[BumRushDaShow]

104. K&R

:kick:

[JerseygirlCT]

107. It's really painful to watch - on all counts, isn't it?

I'm so disappointed by what seems to me a giant case of personal ego over what's best for this party and this country.

I totally agree with your comments about Bill's desire to live vicariously through Hillary's presidency - you put your finger on it. It troubles me greatly. He's simply not ready to be a former president. He's not ready to give up the limelight like that, and become a respectable elder. That's obvious - but the sad part is that that's all there is for him. Like a parent watching his or her child grow into adulthood, there comes a time when it strikes you - sometimes hard - that your youth is over, that a new generation is taking center stage.

As you say, you can help them, or try to thwart them. But nothing, nothing will stop the march of time.

[Steely_Dan]

114. Where is Joe Biden When We Need Him Most

Photo taken January 3rd in Iowa after Biden steps down.

[SoCalDem]

117. I like Joe.. and Chris Dodd, too, and John Edwards

Presidential elections are quirky, aren't they?

People say they want experience, but reject the ones with the most experience, because people lie about what they want..

They want different things at different times..

and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it does not..

[frogcycle]

141. when has it worked out?

JFK, Carter Clinton

four elections out of twelve

[SoCalDem]

142. True.. but all we can do is our best

but sometimes the "work out" is not what we like :grr:

[Autumn]

121. Your post made me cry,

It should have been him.

[Steely_Dan]

125. I'm Sorry, Autumn...

I know that it is a sad picture. But, I thought it spoke to the sorrow I feel myself at a missed opportunity. "....but the saddest words of all are 'what could have been'."

I don't understand how someone of Biden's obvious skill and experience could be left behind. If there was ever a time when this country needed someone like Joe, it was now. If it were any other time, perhaps another candidate. Our country is in real trouble and we do not need to fight unnecessary battles. It matters not if it is Obama or Clinton, there will be battles that we just don't have the time right now to fight. The Right Wing smear machine is already gearing up to swiftboat either candidate.

Sad...so truly sad. Joe and his wife have supported Dem causes all their lives. Joe had to take a second out on his house to send his kids to college. He takes a train every day to work. His son is about to serve in Iraq. He is second to last in total wealth among Senators. He was one of us.

-P

[Autumn]

127. Your right

what the hell were we thinking:cry:

[mnhtnbb]

120. We could have had John Edwards. Instead, we have two entitled

individuals battling each other to assert their entitlement while the Republicans are licking their chops waiting for the general election.

Both Obama and Hillary have done this nation no favor.

[SoCalDem]

128. I liked Edwards too, but for whatever reason

he just didn't "catch fire".. He ran in '04 and it didn't happen either..

I don;t know why, but it just didn;t.

he practically lived in Iowa since '04, and only came in 2nd after all that effort.. I don;t know why ..

[mnhtnbb]

134. I know why; the media doesn't want this country to talk about its problems

which they'd be forced to do if they covered Edwards. People of the country are in huge denial about
our problems, too. Everyone would rather listen to somebody say 'let's all come together' than think
about HOW the problems are going to be solved and what it's going to take.

[okasha]

122. If only the woman had kept her proper place

and stepped aside. . ..

[jonestonesusa]

124. Why the criticism of Obama for running?

I'm a newbie - so let me say "hi" to my progressive brethren before I start...

Hi, and TGIF!

Now - I am an Obama supporter, and I'm glad he's running for a number of reasons. Part of the reason is because we needed a true progressive in the race that has a chance to win. And I say this as someone who has volunteered for Democrats for years, candidates I've loved (Wellstone, Feingold, Alan Cranston - yes, way back then) and candidates that were a compromise by my thinking (Mondale/Ferraro, Kerry, Bill Clinton). I happen to be African American and a liberal, and I've put my time in and went with the party's choice on many occasions when I did not really like the candidate. For me, Obama brings back the grassroots spirit, and in my opinion is less likely to sell out to the drug war/terror war/tyranny of the "traditional" American family than Clinton (BTW, I'm a single parent, and I believe that nearly a majority of children today are born to single parent families). Frankly, I think that Democrats oftentimes run scared from representing many of the people who support them. Democrats, for instance, couldn't get elected to dog catcher without the black vote and the liberal vote, but how often do blacks and liberals get any props from the candidates once they get out of the primary? Yes, you have to appeal beyond the base, but you also have to be who you are, and if the Democrats are not a progressive party that is genuinely proud of my support and works to get it, then I've been wasting my time for many years supporting them.

Let me say one more thing - I do think that some of the policy proposals of the campaign on both sides are superficial. But the campaign is a lot different than the presidency. We do have the legislative records to go on, and Obama's is longer if you include his work in the legislature as well as his time in the Senate. Clinton's may be longer if you count her time as first lady. So it comes down to what do we think about that record. I think that Obama's record in Illinois is quite distinctive, and I believe that he would work effectively across the aisle better than Clinton.

I always like to be convinced otherwise by sound reasoning if you think I'm wrong. We desperately need to have some real discussion and quit trying to be all _Firing Line_ in our political analysis. We have decisions to make that will not start or end with Clinton and Obama. And the discussion on race, as ugly as it is, is needed for our country.

[SoCalDem]

130. Welcome to DU, jonestonesusa

You will fit right in..did you bring your body armor:)

[housewolf]

123. Very moving post

Thanks. It makes me sad too.

[RedEarth]

133. Very good post....

Now, I just feel sick thinking the Democrats might be imploding and in turn miss out on the opportunity to get young voters into our party. I hope we can still attract them, but I've very concerned we might not be able to now.

[RiverStone]

139. Maybe it's not too late to know what might be...

Instead of what could have been.

I'm optimistic by nature, but our trench war and mud slinging is testing that optimism mighty hard.

Though we still may yet surprise ourselves, and find that place of unity.

Before summer, before summer...it must be before we hit the beach.

[SoCalDem]

143. Churchill said we could fight them on the beaches

eek.. I hope not :)

ps.. use sunblock :)