posted
I get that sense, too - that this is the payoff for keeping her part of the bargain. However, the nomination is not Bill's to give away. Talk about a smoke-filled backroom - I think she struck a Faustian bargain and is outraged that it isn't working out. I'm unhappy that she struck the bargain in the first place.
I would be thrilled to vote for a woman for President. I don't want to vote for a woman who is in the position to be elected only because she served as a conspirator to her husband's decades-long adultery with subordinates.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I reject but do not denounce your position.
The "glass ceiling" is societal, historical, impossibly complicated. Who are we to say that there is a net positive in, as it were, throwing a woman candidate through that glass ceiling if she really isn't a decent candidate for president? It's tempting, for many reasons, to throw Hilary through the ceiling, but that would also set a standard for female candidates that I don't particularly like or have much hope for. Why are we always settling on these things and people, when we really could do so much better?
I don't think we actually disagree. I specifically stated that the hypothetical involved two candidates that were otherwise identical, and also stated that I support Obama precisely because he and Hillary are not the same. I'm not sure how you interpreted that as me being willing to "settle" for a bad female candidate just to break the glass ceiling. Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: The creators of legacy threads, posters with a count over 2,000 per year on average, Papa janitor, the Cards, Dagonee, and me.
To this decision there is no appeal. Because I said it first. And that's the way it is.
But we'll all go with the popular vote, so don't let any of the candidates fool you by suggesting that the frontrunner should be VP.
Total nonsense. Hatrack super delegates are those who posted back in the big mouth lion era and who have had a continued presence on the site since that time.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: The creators of legacy threads, posters with a count over 2,000 per year on average, Papa janitor, the Cards, Dagonee, and me.
To this decision there is no appeal. Because I said it first. And that's the way it is.
But we'll all go with the popular vote, so don't let any of the candidates fool you by suggesting that the frontrunner should be VP.
Total nonsense. Hatrack super delegates are those who posted back in the big mouth lion era and who have had a continued presence on the site since that time.
Look, I'm not going to veto this response.
What I'm going to go ahead and do is sign it, and make this statement: I have the right and duty to ignore your argument in my capacity as superdelegate, when it may impinge upon my duty to protect Hatrack.
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: We all know what horrors that has led to.
Entertainment? Thousand-word substitutions?
I hereby reject, denounce , disavow, decry, (and whatever else the kids are saying nowadays) my surrogate/main SN Morbo's screed against smileys. Who could hate a smiley? Posts: 111 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I demand that you repudiate the link, delete it immediately, and then dump this bucket of ashes over your head. I've got some sack cloth you can wear if you don't want to mess up your clothes.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can we please get back to the most important issue? All this talk of race, gender, health care, and war is ridiculous and taking away the focus of this election.
posted
The battle between the Rabbit and Orincoro has been getting nasty lately, nearly coming to blows over the selection of superdelegates. Stay tuned at 5 for our exclusive interview with Orincoro's neighbor's brother's cousin's orthodontist.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
She is stepping down. I don't like it. I think that Ferraro is a bright, perceptive woman, speaking her opinion. It doesn't mean that I agree with everything she said, but I am going to make a distinction between Ferraro and Marge Schott. This entire wave of resignations creates a culture of fear. I appreciate that Ferraro did not apologize. I don't think that ignoring issues of race is the same as working through them. I think it's ridiculous that people aren't supposed to talk about race and gender, unless you are some wonk crunching electoral math, then it's permissable to do so because the paradigms work.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't think that ignoring issues of race is the same as working through them. I think it's ridiculous that people aren't supposed to talk about race and gender, unless you are some wonk crunching electoral math, then it's permissable to do so because the paradigms work.
I don't think what Ferraro said could be considered working through issues of race and gender. She gave no critical evaluation of how race was influencing Obama voters or how gender was influencing Clinton voters. What she did was make unsubstantiated racist and sexist accusations.
I've been in the position where I have been told point blank to my face that my success was only because I was a woman. The people who've made such comments did so to excuse themselves from giving me the respect they gave other people who had received similar honors. They did so without even looking at my record. What's more I've seen the same thing done to other minorities and women and many of them had achievements that far exceeded those of their white male peers.
If Ferraro had talked specifically about the ways in which race has helped Obama and the ways in which its hurt him (say for example with hispanic voters), that would have been working through issues of race. What she did was make unsubstantiated racist claims.
From my perspective, the average democrat (if there is such a thing) doesn't really care much about either the race or gender issues. I think if either Clinton or Obama were white men, it would make more of a difference but I think in this particular case they cancel each other out. Clinton has a core of older progressive women who supporter more strongly because she is a woman. Obama has a group of progressive black voters who support him more strongly because he is black. I haven't done the math to figure out which is the larger group but then neither has Ferraro. At the same time Clinton faces some voters who don't support her because she is a woman and they fear the sexist hatred the right wing has for her. Similarly Obama's race is a negative with some voters (for example Hispanics).
Given all of that, I don't think its clear which if either of them gains from the race and gender issues. Given the complexity of the dynamic, comments like Ferraro's, which are unaccompanied by any substantive analysis, come across as merely part of a culture of victimization that turns off most people.
I think that Ferraro, and other feminists, had hoped Hillary would generate a lot of excitement among progressives because she is the first serious woman contender for President. I think that they are bitter that she isn't getting a ground swell of support from progressive women and are looking for a scape goat. Perhaps they have some justification. I think if Hillary were facing a white male opponent, people would be more excited about the fact that she is a woman. Obama's race cancels that out because both candidates pretty much satisfy most of the progressives who would be excited to see someone other than a white anglo-saxon male elected president.
Its extremely dangerous for Clinton's campaign to go down this road because she is so vulnerable on this issue. By any objective analysis, Clinton's most prominent public role was as wife of the President a role which she didn't achieve either by election or working her way up the latter and for which gender was a key qualification. Ferraro's comments injured her campaign not primarily because Obama made a big deal out of them but because they open the door for people to critically assess how gender and family connections have benefitted Hillary in the race. Would she even be considered a contender if she had never married Bill Clinton? That's a question its impossible to answer since we have no idea what Hillary would have done with her career if she weren't married to Bill but I think that we can clearly say that if you omit her role as first lady from her resume', there is little in it to qualify her as a top contender for the democratic nomination.
[ March 12, 2008, 09:05 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
But if Hillary were male, she wouldn't have been able to marry Bill Clinton and she would never have been in the position she's in now, so for her campaign to degrade Obama for his race while crying sexism if particularly hypocritical.
*Refrains from drifting the thread to an average gay rights brawl*
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholar: The battle between the Rabbit and Orincoro has been getting nasty lately, nearly coming to blows over the selection of superdelegates. Stay tuned at 5 for our exclusive interview with Orincoro's neighbor's brother's cousin's orthodontist.
"Well, I don't know, I didn't see anything... I heard Barack Obama is a muslim... So yeah."
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A video recap of Ferraro's media feeding frenzy. Short version: She's outraged Barack's people are spinning her comments to make her look racist.
I think I've totally got outrage exhaustion. The word and it's synonyms have been drained of all meaning in this primary season.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keith Olbermann has a long special comment on the Ferrero Fiasco and other recent Clinton campaign moments. It's getting some blogospheric buzz for taking Clinton to task for her tactics.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:At the same time Clinton faces some voters who don't support her because she is a woman and they fear the sexist hatred the right wing has for her.
The right wing's hatred of her is not necessarily sexist. It is mostly disgust that rubbed off of Bill - or if you know her well enough, her statements about wanting to be the second coming of Eleanor Roosevelt will scare you.
It's a pity Elizabeth Dole is as old as McCain, or I'd consider her an excellent VP. As I was reading up on her yesterday, I learned that Lynne Cheney was also considered as a VP by Bush, evidently.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
[gossip]My friend who has worked in various offices said that while Bob Dole was a complete sweetheart to work for and with, Elizabeth Dole was rough with her staff and not pleasant to be around at all.[/gossip]
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, while I can see why people would see racism, I really don't think that there's much direct racism in Ferraro's statements, although when you find yourself sounding like Rush Limbaugh ("Donovan McNabb is only considered good because he's black."), you really need to reconsider what you're saying.
She wasn't trying to make a racial comment by implying that he's an empty affirmative action candidate. She was trying to dismiss him as a serious candidate. This has been the Clinton campaign strategy from just about the beginning. The "people are supporting him because he is black" is secondary to the "and that's the only he has the support he does." She was not only belittling Barack Obama, but also the fool who are supporting him.
There is a ring of truth to the first part. There are people who are supporting Barack Obama partially (or even near fully) because he is black. There are also people who are against him in various degrees because he's black. And there are people who are for him because he's a man (or rather not a woman) and against him (or rather for Hillary Clinton) because he's a man.
That's part of how letting people decide things like this for whatever reason they want works.
---
To a certain extent, I feel that focusing on the racist angle is missing an opportunity for the Obama campaign. If they focused on addressing the second part I think that not only would they beat Hillary Clinton easily, but they'd put themselves in better position to face John McCain in the general.
Imagine the speech that he could give, talking about how, while the racism thing is distressing, he's more concerned about the pattern of trying to dismiss him as a fad. The speech almost writes itself and you know Sen Obama could deliver the heck out of it. Get the right writers and you could give a speech that would be recorded in history.
Working the racism angle will pick you up a bit, but it's destructive and a little low. It's the expected political thing and I think we all know how we feel about that. I think focusing on the why he's a serious candidate, judging he and his opponents on who they are and what they stand for, not what they are, but also touching on what it would mean to be the first President who was black could be extremely positive and inspirational. It could be a barn burner.
---
Irami, I'm not sure I understand your affirmation of Rep Ferarro's remarks. From what I can tell, you are agreeing that Sen Obama being black has been the thing that has gotten him to where he is. If I recall correctly, you previously were claiming that being black was a great liability for him, because many white people wouldn't vote for him. I'm not sure how to reconcile these stances.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In other news, Mitt Romney does another 180, this time going back on his "I won't be a McCain Vice President. That's something that's not going to happen." by actively soliciting the VP nod from John McCain.
edit: Oops. I thought I was in the campaign thread. This doesn't really belong here. I'm moving it over there.
posted
Obama hasn't gotten where he is by being black, he's gotten where he is by not being bitter about it, by not taking entitlement in his minority status. That's why I like him, anyway, and I think it's what gives him leadership quality.
P.S. Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee are all poison. If McCain is smart, he won't touch any of them. Thompson would be okay.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:She wasn't trying to make a racial comment by implying that he's an empty affirmative action candidate. She was trying to dismiss him as a serious candidate.
posted
If it weren't for one heck of a speech in 2004, he wouldn't be where he is. If he weren't such an excellent and inspiring speaker, he wouldn't be there. If it weren't for his enormously attractive mode of politics, he wouldn't be there.
Ferraro should be ashamed of herself for dismissing a major candidate so and trying to reduce him to nothing but his race.
If it weren't for winning the Senate election, he wouldn't be where he is.
If it weren't for marrying Bill, Hillary wouldn't be where she is.
If it weren't for Bill's blatant infidelity with an intern while President, it is very likely that Hillary wouldn't be where she is.
Something that should have bothered Hillary about Ferraro's comment was the way it reflected on her - that Hillary is only a contender because she's a woman. I think Hillary is desperate and she's grasping at anything to stay in the game, including condoning this kind of complete crap.
What bothered me was the enormous sense of entitlement apparently prevelant in Hillary's camp - that Obama is a "problem for Hillary" and those who support him are traitors to the heir apparent. He's getting more votes and more delegates and so he's winning. Welcome to a republic!
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obama's keynote speech at the 2004 convention truly inspired me, which was surprising, almost unique for a middle-aged misanthrope like me. I'd encourage anyone who never saw it to watch it.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seems to me that Obama got where he is today because he's a really good candidate for President. Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Something that should have bothered Hillary about Ferraro's comment was the way it reflected on her - that Hillary is only a contender because she's a woman
The great thing is that Rep Ferarro, while saying that Barack Obama's sucess is due to his race, claimed that Hillary Clinton is getting treated unfairly because she's a woman.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If it weren't for Bill's blatant infidelity with an intern while President, it is very likely that Hillary wouldn't be where she is.
I don't understand this part. I saw Hillary as reaching for the crown from day one of the first term, wanting to be co-president rather than first lady.
I'd like to redirect again that Bill's problem was that he systematically sexually harassed women in his employ, and then he lied about it to a Federal Grand Jury. That's the ick.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It has been speculated (I'd post links, but I'm lazy - google if you're interested) that in exchange for Hillary supporting Bill during that crapfest, he would do everything in his power to give the presidency to her next.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure I understand your affirmation of Rep Ferarro's remarks. From what I can tell, you are agreeing that Sen Obama being black has been the thing that has gotten him to where he is. If I recall correctly, you previously were claiming that being black was a great liability for him, because many white people wouldn't vote for him. I'm not sure how to reconcile these stances.
It's a liability in the general, blacks are way overrepresentated in the democrat south, and in the democratic party in general (for all of those hacks who say that the democrats have been fooling us ignorant blacks for all these years, we've finally saved up and bought ourselves a candidate.)
As to Ferraro, I take her comment as a lot of people are caught up in this Obama myth and forget that the myth may not be adequate to the facts of the job of the US Presidency-- compared to Clinton-- and this myth is intricately tied to the color of Obama's skin. I may not agree with all of her sentiments, but they are not so beyond the pale that she should be shamed from admitting them to public discourse.
quote:Originally posted by katharina: It has been speculated (I'd post links, but I'm lazy - google if you're interested) that in exchange for Hillary supporting Bill during that crapfest, he would do everything in his power to give the presidency to her next.
I guess I don't understand what he has the power to do, besides come across as likeable. Or is it just that it hasn't panned out the way they'd hoped in the Primaries? I thought it was just general expedience and her ambition guided by (in her own words) "What would Eleanor do?"
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure I understand. Barack Obama is the front runner in the Deomcratic primaries and is polling to destroy John McCain if he makes it to the general (which seems likely right now) because of the advantage of being black, but being black is a liability in the Democratic party and in the general election?
I don't see how both of these things can be true. They seem strictly contradictory to me.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Barack Obama is the front runner in the Deomcratic primaries and is polling to destroy John McCain if he makes it to the general (which seems likely right now) because of the advantage of being black, but being black is a liability in the Democratic party and in the general election?
I don't believe the polls.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fine. We can discount the polls for the general (at least until Barack Obama wins the general, if that occurs), I guess.
However, I'm not sure how you can discount the fact that the majority of democrats have voted for him, which you are saying is due to him being black while at the same time saying that being black is a liability for a candidate with the Democratic party in general.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I guess I don't understand what he has the power to do, besides come across as likeable.
Well, he is a pretty charismatic figure, so his schmoozing superdelegates could be a pretty powerful tool for the campaign. He also has enough clout in the party and enough experience in politics to be able to call in favors from some superdelegates and threaten others into cooperation, if he so chose.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: However, I'm not sure how you can discount the fact that the majority of democrats have voted for him, which you are saying is due to him being black while at the same time saying that being black is a liability for a candidate with the Democratic party in general.
Being a black isn't a major liability for a candidate within the democratic party-- it's a blessing in some states and a curse in others-- it is a liability for a democratic candidate in the general election. The same can be said for being a women.
quote:What, you don't believe Obama would or could win against McCain? Dare I ask why?
It's easy for non-black moderates to vote for Mccain.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
He was the leader of his party for 8 years. He's got a lot of contacts and a lot of power in the party, both in the party structure and the party base. He was more popular during the 2004 elections than the person running for President.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Being a black isn't a major liability for a candidate within the democratic party-- it's a blessing in some states and a curse in others-- it is a liability for a democratic candidate in the general electio.
I misunderstood what you said. I thought you had said that it is a liability both in the general and in the Democratic party in general, but the second part was a misunderstanding.
However, you seem to be drawing back from support of Geraldine Ferarro's statements. If being black is beneficial in some places and a liability in others in the Democratic primaries, it seems like that couldn't be the reason why he is where he is right now. Am I right that you are stepping back or can you reconcile this?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Noeman, I'd say: "Huh, didn't see that coming."
Then again, I was a bit appalled that our democracy chose Bush in '04.
MrSquicky,
Mostly, I support her right to say it. I don't find her opinion offensive. She freely admits that one of the reasons she was on the VP ticket in 84 was because she was a woman. It's not a bad thing; rather, it's the state of affairs, and let's not get carried away. I may not agree, but it's a far from unreasonable position to hold.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
It seems to me that a Barack Obama victory would largely invalidate your view of race and racism in America society and politics. If he won, do you see any major changes that you'd feel compelled to make in your worldview?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:It seems to me that a Barack Obama victory would largely invalidate your view of race and racism in America society and politics. If he won, do you see any major changes that you'd feel compelled to make in your worldview?
Sure. The extent would depend upon who voted where and why.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure I understand. Barack Obama is the front runner in the Deomcratic primaries and is polling to destroy John McCain if he makes it to the general
quote:McCain is behind by 0 to 3 points in the latest polls I could find.
Wow, I was used to seeing Sen Obama at around +10-13%. I really haven't been keeping up with things lately. I'm a little disappointed in how many things I've thought were true lately turn out not necessarily to be. I may need to pull back on stuff until I'm not so busy.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obama's big leads were back when a lot of conservatives still hoped for someone else. Also, Obama was weakened by Clinton surviving March 4. Here's a pollster plot of McCain v. Obama.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
