BlogHer - Will Clinton's Women Swing? - Comments

Maybe it isn't just

shellie — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:35:33 -0500

Maybe it isn't just 'revenge' or 'anger' or 'because he put a woman on' etc etc. Maybe they have good reasons. Several polls throughout the summer and even after both conventions, showed only about half of Hillary's supporters planning to vote for Obama. About 1/4 were planning to vote for McCain and another 1/4 planning to stay home in protest.

Even if you discount the stay-homes and look only at those actually voting for McCain, that 18-25% of Hillary supporters is a lot of people. Do you really want to assign bad motives to all of them?

At the time of the NH primary, Gloria Steinem wrote an op-ed for the NYT saying that cleaning up after Bush Jr might take four terms: two for Hillary and two for Obama. Unfortunately Obama refused Hillary's offer of Clinton/Obama, but it's possible that one or two terms of McCain/Palin might make a start at the cleanup, doing a better job than Obama would, as well as leaving Hillary free to run in 2012.

McCain may not progress as fast as we'd like on things like health care (he's just announced a proposal something like Hillary's HOLC for the mortgage crisis), but he's unlikely to make the awful blunders that Obama might make in foreign or financial matters. And Palin as 'the future of the GOP' is certainly better than some other GOPs who might become their future.

Good Grief

cshayr — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:40:11 -0500

I can't believe that women are willing to vote for McCain simply because he has a woman on the ticket. I have to admit that initially, I was angry about Hillary not getting the nomination. However, that quickly turned when Palin began to open her mouth.

I was insulted as a female voter that Palin would be the alternative female placed on the ticket. Are you kidding me? Have you heard her talk? And I am totally dismissing the debate because she clearly had three weeks to be coached for it.

Nope, i am solidly behind Obama now. Listening to Palin and McCain speak turns my stomach.

It's funny, I don't know of

earlgreyrooibos — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:15:08 -0500

It's funny, I don't know of any "defectors" voting for McCain out of revenge. Most of my friends were either Obama supporters from the start, or they're "any Democrat, I don't care which Democrat" voters. I think the second set of people bother me the most, as much as it bothers my family members who unquestioningly vote Republican without even considering the other candidates.

I've heard various conspiracy theories saying that the "spiteful" Clinton voter stories are overblown, and created to reduce solidarity within the Democratic party. From my observations, they're right, although I suppose I might not be looking hard enough.

Still don't get it

Maria Niles — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:30:22 -0500

I certainly respect your right to vote against Obama and appreciate that you've laid out your reasoning here. I really appreciate it because you are the first and only person I've seen so thank you.

But I have to say your reasoning puzzles me.

McCain was closer to the center years ago but has moved markedly to the right in order to appeal to the Republican base.

I don't understand how Clinton has gained this reputation of being more centrist than Obama when most of her policy suggestions are classic liberal Democratic positions. And Americans are far more Democratic than Republican (72 vs. 55 million in 2004, likely higher after 2006)

Certainly she is slightly more hawkish than Obama but by the end of the campaign she had moved to calling for a faster withdrawal of troops from Iraq (using the exact same approach) than Obama - ~12 months vs. 16. If you supported Clinton's call for an end to the war, how is McCain's promise to not end the war closer to your values?

And, my father is a war veteran so, like you, I come from a family of service and sacrifice and I've grown up with an understanding of military issues yet I, like Obama, my father and a majority of the American people, don't believe that speaking to leaders of other countries will lead to an increase of terrorism. Terrorism has increased and flourished while we haven't engaged.

Also I don't understand how a lack of a mandate in Obama's health plan (the mandate would be characterized as the more "liberal" prescription in that it is greater government control of your choices) would make McCain's lack of any health insurance plan more in line with the values of Clinton supporters. And I personally disagree with the idea that the uninsured are choosing SUVs and TVs over health insurance. Rather I think the problem is that it is unaffordable or inaccessible because insurance companies deny coverage.

I don't think you are out for revenge and I respect how you evaluate what you hear when Obama speaks. But I still don't get how if you found Clinton's ideas and values in line with your own how you can find McCain's more compatible than Obama's. I think you are right that you would be voting against Obama and this seems to be justification for that vote since Clinton and McCain appear to share few values.

ConsumerPop Marketing
PopConsumer (Politics, Current Events & Links)
Beyond Help (Music, TV & Pop Culture)

A joke!

heivilinj — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:19:07 -0500

Many years ago when I was a young second lieutenant stationed in Germany we used to say "Nuke'em till they glow then shoot'em in the dark".

But it was A JOKE!
(It's not so funny nowadays)

Jim Heivilin

I also

heivilinj — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:16:03 -0500

I also would be interested in this discussion. But then I really don't fathom women who tell me they're Republican.
(well said Erin)

Jim Heivilin

Sunni vs. Shia

Maria Niles — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:52:33 -0500

Personally I'm much less concerned by someone who confused which concentration camp his great uncle helped liberate than someone who repeatedly confuses Sunni and Shia and where Al Qaeda operates.

And 2/3 of the American people support speaking to our adversaries because um bombing first, talking later has worked out so well.

ConsumerPop Marketing
PopConsumer (Politics, Current Events & Links)
Beyond Help (Music, TV & Pop Culture)

Very Good Points

Megan Smith — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:44:58 -0500

Hi Erin,

Thanks for providing the facts and figures I didn't have at my fingertips.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/YouTube
Megan's Minute
Video Runway

Disagree

Maria Niles — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:44:48 -0500

Is Obama inexperienced? Absolutely

I have to challenge you on the statement that it is absolute that Obama is inexperienced. Obama has more legislative experience than does Clinton. So is he more experienced? Experience is measured differently by different people and I personally reject the notion that Obama is inexperienced.

But as to the idea that he would be learning on the job, there I agree as I am of the belief that is true for all presidents. There is no training for the job other than doing it.

ConsumerPop Marketing
PopConsumer (Politics, Current Events & Links)
Beyond Help (Music, TV & Pop Culture)

Well said . . .

Kalyn Denny — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:35:29 -0500

in the Boston Globe. I can only speak for myself (and my friends) but no swing to McCain will be happening around here.

Kalyn Denny
Kalyn's Kitchen

Oh what the heck

Erin Kotecki Vest — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:52:00 -0500

I will jump in to correct some things here-

1) the campaign statement on Obama's mis-speaking on Auschwitz "“Senator Obama’s family is proud of the service of his grandfather and uncles in World War II — especially the fact that his great uncle was a part of liberating one of the concentration camps at Buchenwald,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement. “Yesterday he mistakenly referred to Auschwitz instead of Buchenwald in telling of his personal experience of a soldier in his family who served heroically.”

The campaign said his great uncle, Charlie Payne, served in the 89th Infantry Division, and that the unit was among those to liberate Ohrdruf on April 4, 1945."

Of course, if you'd like to talk about misspeaking we can go over all of McCains as well.

2) The pledge by Obama to speak to all world leaders- find info here http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/511/

and note it does discuss the “Ronald Reagan met with Gorbachev; Kennedy met with Khruschev; and Nixon met with Mao " which is entirely true. Since when is Diplomacy a BAD thing?

3) Health care- Senator Obama just announced that he will be working with Elizabeth Edwards on healthcare, someone who we all know preferred Senator Clinton's plan to his.

...and last, if you think abortion is the only issue on the table when voting McCain and 'women' please think again. Quoting Susan Jhirad http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/0...

"Let me get this straight; you consider yourself a Democrat and a feminist. Yet rather than vote for a man who supports a woman's right to choose, children's healthcare, and an end to the war in Iraq, you would vote for a man who voted against all of these things.

You would vote for a man who is promising to nominate far-right activists for the Supreme Court, a man who votes consistently against choice, affirmative action, and workers' rights.

You would vote for a man who supports President Bush on most major issues vs. a man whose positions are quite similar to Clinton's.

I just don't get it."

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

A Reasoned Argument

Megan Smith — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:35:56 -0500

I guess that's all I'm looking for: reasoned arguments why some former women Hillary supporters might vote for McCain. Which is what you've given here.

Personally, I'm not sure who I'm voting for either. I'm very hawkish when it comes to defense and the fight against terrorism and I'm very much for universal health care.

Those issues and the fact that she had already been in the White House were for me, Hillary's greatest strengths. But now that a vote for her is no longer available, I'm just about certain I'll vote for Obama.

I don't see John McCain getting us any closer to universal healthcare, even though I do think he's closer to my views than Obama on defense.

Is Obama inexperienced? Absolutely and if he's elected, he'll be learning on the job. But so has every other first time president, and so will John McCain if he's elected.

Either way, this is going to be new territory for everyone.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/YouTube
Megan's Minute
Video Runway

Thank you

Denise — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:48:12 -0500

Just, well, thank you.

I'm with you on almost every word and some day I'll have the time to blog this topic alongside you.

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings

I am a Clinton supporter, or

marshamlow — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:36:50 -0500

I am a Clinton supporter, or should I say former Clinton supporter. I haven't entirely made up my mind how I will vote yet. I am leaning toward McCain, though.

I feel that McCain more closely reflects my values; he is close to the center as was Clinton. I feel that a good portion of the US is republican and Obama is so far off the mark that he would do to the Democratic Party what Bush has done to the Republican Party.

My husband serves in the military and our family has made many sacrifices to serve our country and I cannot vote for someone who doesn't even know that Russia freed the prisoners in Auschwitz and not the Americans. Or what about the pledge by Obama to talk to the leader of any country to be more open. How can he not understand that this will cause an increase in terrorism, all you have to do is kill a bunch of people and declare yourself the leader to get an audience with the United States. His health care plan which does not require every American to be covered concerns me too. The reason our health care costs are so high is due to so many people not having coverage, the hospital has to serve them and then they cannot pay, their bill is rolled into mine at my next visit. Too many Americans are choosing SUV's and big screen tvs over paying for health care.

Every speech he gives is about hope and out with the old in with the new. The little bits of plans I hear are lacking in knowledge of history that it concerns me. I feel that he is a liberal Bush, in that he has no clue about what has happened in the past and the consequences of his choices, and he will repeat mistakes that have already been made, instead of moving toward a better future. I would rather see a repulbican in office and wait until we can find a qualified democrat because otherwise our ideas will be lost for generations instead of just for four years.

I guess my vote is against Obama. Does that make me out for revenge? To me foreign policy, the economy, health care and gas are more important than abortion. Maybe there will be an independent candidate that I can get behind but for now I would rather have a qualified republican than Obama.

Is This All About Revenge?

Megan Smith — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:00:01 -0500

Hi Mary,

I don't get the whole, "because Hillary didn't get the nomination, I'm going to vote for McCain" movement, because a lot of it sounds like a quest for revenge.

If you're a democratic woman and you want to vote for McCain, vote for McCain because you believe in his issues. Don't vote for McCain as revenge.

And revenge for what? Because Hillary lost the nomination? Because she lost to someone they feel needs to be punished? And punished for what?

It was a political campaign. A tough, tightly contested political campaign and Hillary lost. It's time to deal with it. I would understand the movement more if these people were saying they weren't going to vote at all. But a blunt declaration that "we're voting for McCain," from my perspective sounds hostile.

There's a school of thought among some black women bloggers that the "Clinton voters for McCain" people are really trying to punish black women for supporting Obama and not Hillary. (Oprah among them...and no, I'm not kidding.)

I have no idea if that's true or not, but as a black woman, when I read some of the anti-Obama quotes from former Hillary supporters it makes me wonder.

Sigh...here we go.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/YouTube
Megan's Minute
Video Runway

Will Clinton's Women Swing?

Mary Katharine Ham — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:21:58 -0500

One of my favorite political analysts, Kirsten Powers, writes this week about the Democrats' potential woman problem:

McCain started courting Clinton's voters in the days between that
last primary and her concession speech. He said the media had
mistreated Clinton and talked of how much he respects her, noting she
was often underappreciated.

Now he's planning a campaign tour
to reach out to her voters, as well as to independent female voters.
His campaign has dedicated part of its Web site to them, and is
mobilizing high-profile female surrogates to flood states where Clinton
won.

The McCain camp no doubt knows what the Bush camp knew in
2004: The Democratic Party has a history of taking its base voters for
granted. Women are now being treated the way African-Americans normally
are: We don't need to do anything to win them over, because where are
they going to go?

After 2000, the Republican National
Committee began an aggressive outreach effort to try and peel off black
support from the Democratic Party and saw success in swing states such
as Ohio and Florida, where it targeted its efforts.

No one thinks Republicans will increase their margins with African-Americans with Obama on the ticket this time, but the GOP's unexpected inroads with that community show it's not out of the question with women voters this time around. It's already happened one time:

Many Democrats believe all Clinton's supporters will "come home"
once they learn about McCain's position on the choice issue. But some
doubt it.

Geraldine Ferraro dismissed the idea in a
conversation with me last week - noting that these voters had already
voted for an anti-abortion rights Republican before: Ronald Reagan.
More, she said, these sophisticated voters know that Democrats will
keep control of Congress no matter what, blocking any extremist
nominees for the Supreme Court.

One of the many Web sites that
has cropped up for disgruntled Clinton supporters, "Don't Be a Good
Democrat!" has a section called "Is it safe to vote Republican?" This
outlines why Hillary supporters needn't fear voting for McCain,
including Ferraro's argument. Another group, called "Clinton's for
McCain" is making the case for switching their votes.

And, McCain is arguably a more centrist candidate than Reagan, who has just as much potential with women voters as Reagan did, if not more. What happens if McCain picks the conservative governor of Alaska as his running mate, as some have buzzed about. Sarah Palin is an outdoorswoman, a fiscal reformer, a Republican who ran against the establishment and for "change," and a mom. Having Palin and Carly Fiorina in the upper echelons of the McCain campaign can't help but draw some attention.

What do you think? Will Hillary's women swing? I ran across a group on a Hillary forum this week calling themselves "PUMAs," for "Party United My A$$." It may be a tough road ahead for Obama with these folks, and only a small segment of them has to break off to cause a problem for him.