The Electoral Argument Is Driving Me Mad
I’m working very hard to keep the election completely tuned out until roughly a week before Pennsylvania, but everyday it seems the bullshit seeps through my shields. The most disturbing argument coming from Clinton surrogates is that Clinton has won more big electoral states and, therefore, has a better chance at winning them in the fall. The argument being used assumes that because Clinton, a Democrat, beat Obama, a Democrat, in these states she is better suited to winDemocratic voters in the general election. The theory seems absolutely absurd to me, because it seems to be based on the assumption that all of the Clinton voters are suddenly going to jump ship if Obama wins the nomination and not vote for him. Hello? What? Clinton is winning the Democratic base, Obama is bringing in new voters. Do these people, such as Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, really think that Clinton voters are so fickle that they will jump ship and vote Republican? If so, how does he know that? It seems to me that Democratic voters are turning out en masse, not simply because they want to vote for Clinton or Obama, but because everyone has a deep sense that this country is going in the wrong direction and we need change. It is really sad that Rendell doesn’t believe in his own party. Using this straw man scare tactic does a huge disservice to his constituents.
Well said.
It does seem incredible that suddenly we are to accept the storyline that the Democrat that loses any primary against another Democrat, will not get those Democratic votes come election if they were to finish first. Since when do Democratic primary voters decide who of their own are going to vote Republican or not vote at all, because they voted for a different Democrat?
I think someone in the Democratic party establishment has been studding Bush league psychology too closely. Are Rovian fear tactics now that much a part of accepted American consensus reality? Now we make up what reality is and see if our illusion sticks enough to scare someone out of context and out of fact based perception.
Debate may be good to provide contrast, but when it is used to make similarities suddenly be declared as different as black and white, or male and female, polarization may end up being the end of any new beginning the nation may be yearning for.
Otherwise, we are now seeing one Democrat, in effect, make the argument for the other party to win if they personally do not.
Service to the country? Or, something selfish this way comes?