BlogHer - PRIMARIES - Comments

Oregon – Rehab

ehsan85 — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:01:49 -0600

Natural treatment in the country. 70% Success Rate. These Graduates go
on to live productive, drug free lives – relapse FREE! Testimonials
provided. oregon drug rehab

MSNBC calls Kentucky for Clinton

neiljones753 — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 06:40:03 -0600

Beginning the final weekend of campaigning before Tuesday's primary in Kentucky where she is heavily favored against Democratic frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama, Clinton held an outdoor picnic rally for about 1,000 people on the grounds of the Maker's Mark Distillery, the oldest operating bourbon distillery in the world and a national historic landmark.

--------------------------

neiljones753

oregon drug rehab

I was thrilled

Maria Niles — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:03:26 -0500

to highlight this story, Jill. It gives me hope to see voters rejecting ugly, hateful campaign tactics.

Thanks for noting this race

Jill Miller Zimon — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 22:18:47 -0500

I started following it back in March or April or something - i'm embarassed to check out exactly when because my memory is getting so bad I'll have to admit how far off I am. BUT - it was several months ago. I'd heard about the anti-Semitic flyers and then learned more about Cohen, what he was doing in Congress and how his constituents felt about him There really isn't any better story about how strong we have the potential to be and how most voters are not stupid and can't be duped than a story like this one.

I really appreciate you highlighting it, Maria.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Thanks, Nordette and I hope you're right

Maria Niles — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 21:44:13 -0500

Thank you, Nordette for providing additional context. I agree that it is a good thing that Tinker's desperate attempt failed. I do hope that indeed the outcomes in these races indicate that we are "shifting our thinking and growing up."

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

Are we shifting our thinking and growing up?

Nordette — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:35:41 -0500

Great post, Maria, and when I read it I thought of a recent BookTV interview with Rick Perlstein, author of Nixonland.

We still seem to be fighting our political battles using the same language bequeathed to us by Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagon in the 60s even though the reality on the ground is truly a lot less contentious. (BookTV interview with Rick Perlstein)

After analyzing a recent special election in Mississipi in which the Democrat defeated the Republican who used the same old southern strategy for winning (the let's scare the white voters with black people strategy), Perlstein thinks there's a ray of hope that we're stepping into a new way of looking at our culture and politics. He said the Republican ran scare tactic TV ads with typical southern strategy rhetoric like the Democrat refused to denounce Obama for his "hateful, anti-American" preacher, and the Democrat refused to denouce Obama for his statements about bitterness among rural (white) people. Nevertheless, the Republican lost his conservative district, one that Bush won in 2004.

I read your post and considered that possibly Tinker got a taste of this from the black community. She went to an old-school textbook strategy of racial division for winning elections, assuming people feel the same way they felt years ago, but it backfired. And that's a good thing.

Perlstein's still undecided on whether we're shifting our thinking and growing up when it comes to cultural divides and politics, but he's entertaining the idea, he says.

Thank you again, Maria.

Nordette is a Contributing Editor with BlogHer.com whose personal blog is hosted on another site at this link. Her most recent post on BlogHer at the time of this comment is "Bernie Mac Dies of Pneumonia at 50"

it could be great if Hillary

guniwan — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:41:51 -0500

it could be great if Hillary and Obama be The One and Second Person in Usa.

Goonie

Baby 1st Year Care

(i'm just sayin' is all..)

sarahdopp — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:44:43 -0500

Lisa Stone for President, 2012!

Dopp Juice.
http://www.doppjuice.com

You misunderstand my statement

Maria Niles — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:42:41 -0500

I did not say that choosing one candidate for nominee means that I don't think supporters on either side won't vote for the other in the general election. That's why I think this whole "Hillary has to be VP or her primary supporters will not vote for Obama" argument is bogus. The voters and dynamics of primary and general elections are different. But Lisa asked if Clinton's letter will build bridges. I don't think it will nor do I think it has to. It speaks to her supporters and it doesn't speak to Obama supporters but that's not what will affect general election votes.

I'm talking about the hardcore supporters who are amplified and magnified in blog comments (everywhere but here), twitter and the media. I don't think I'm that rare of a breed it's just that people like me who don't bully generally don't comment or get shown on cable news because we don't make for good TV or YouTube.

And my statement is not that sweeping. I'm just saying that that letter like speeches from either of them are not going to appeal to or inspire the other's ardent fans. I read that letter and am annoyed by the tone. Ardent Clinton supporters are reassured and impressed. I don't like her approach or style and wince when I hear her speeches that emphasize "I" and "me." I am energized and excited by Obama's words. See Liz's comment below. Clinton inspires her and Obama does not. Laurie White has commented here that she has listened to Obama's speeches and doesn't get it and can't understand what I hear in them. And if Clinton were the nominee I would vote for her without question but not because of a letter that Obama would have written to his supporters in a style that reassured and appealed to us. No matter. We will all vote for the Democratic candidate because it is the issues that matter and both Obama and Clinton are both highly competent and qualified candidates.

That doesn't mean that I believe that it is not possible to like and be thrilled by each candidate. I started off open to the entire field of strong Democratic candidates but I became an ardent Obama supporter and increasingly disappointed in Clinton over the course of the campaign. Ultimately many people were much more passionate about one candidate than the other. I know that is because of style not substance and the rhetorical approach is part of that.

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

That's a sweeping statement, with which I disagree

Elisa Camahort — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:33:37 -0500

Explain how I was thrilled and excited about both candidates, then, if each approach "mystifies and does not appeal to" the other side's supporters? That is just SUCH an assumption, not borne out, I should add by the data that the majority of both's supporters would have voted for the other.

I have been trying over the last couple of weeks to recapture the excitement I had over both candidates six months ago. I can do this because I finally realized that it was neither actual candidate who really let me down this election season, it was their most extreme supporters and their behavior. You, Maria, are a rare breed who can ardently support someone without bullying or excoriating those who are on the same side about 90% of the issues, and just voting for a different candidate. Many HRC and BO supporters were not so capable.

I don't follow mainstream media or the rightwing blogosphere that much, so the biggest disappointment I have is how much the Democratic and left-wing blogosphere and twittersphere disappointed me. There's a whole post I need to write about this, but until I do I will just keep reminding myself: I still like Obama and Clinton. Very, very much.

Elisa Camahort
BlogHer
elisa@blogher.org

Hillary's letter

Liz Rizzo — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:37:24 -0500

I liked her speech on Tuesday, and I liked the letter and the request for letters. I wrote to her and expressed my hope and desire to see her as the VP candidate.

Personally, it is my intention to set up a regular contribution if she is on the ticket because I continue to find her so inspiring, which I won't do for an Obama ticket that doesn't inspire me. But then, it's not like he needs my money anyway. ;)

Liz Rizzo

I blog at Everyday Goddess.

No bridges, but

Maria Niles — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:26:26 -0500

This letter will certainly not build bridges to Obama supporters but I don't think it needs to. The key differences between Obama and Clinton are primarily in style, tone and approach to politics and leadership and around the margins of policy and in the underlying schools of thought in which their very similar policy proposals are based.

Clinton's message has been "what I will do for you" whereas Obama's has been "what we will do together." Each candidate's rhetorical approach appeals to their supporters and mystifies and does not appeal to supporters of the other. But it is just style and those who would vote for McCain based on bruised feelings and not for the candidate who offers much the same policies as does Clinton, did not support Clinton on substance in the first place. As Clinton's very strong supporter Hilary Rosen said "I am not a bargaining chip. I am a Democrat."

What will matter most is that Clinton vigorously and enthusiastically campaigns for the Democratic ticket. I believe she will.

And personally I don't want to see her as VP. I think the arguments regarding her delivering voters are based on faulty reasoning. An idea I like much better is that I would love to see her on the Supreme Court. I used to like the idea of Senate Majority Leader but now I think she could make a greater and certainly longer lasting impact on the court.

I hope and believe that her candidacy will serve as a catalyst for more women to run for office. I however will not be one of them. That is a decision I made as a teen after working in politics. And it has nothing to do with how women are treated. It has to do with how we treat people as human beings in politics. Plus campaigning is ugly, nasty and focused more on raising money than on policy work. I'd be interested in doing the work and service but I have no interest in being a highly scrutinized and judged beggar.

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

A Very Positive Letter

Megan Smith — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:26:03 -0500

Hi Lisa,

I think it's a very positive letter and one that was required for the Democratic Party to start to pull together.

She's earned an offer of the VP spot running with Obama, but that pairing comes with several pitfalls and I would understand if he didn't choose her.

It might actually be better for the campaign if Obama picked someone else, but it would have to be someone with a very good background in foreign policy and an experienced knowledge of how to get things done in Washington.

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

That is an interesting poll

Erin Kotecki Vest — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:40:25 -0500

I really do appreciate everything Senator Clinton has done, as a woman, to lead the way even if it's still hard for this 3rd(4th?) wave feminist to acknowledge much of the sexism that still exists.

Do I wish she would have done it differently, sure. And I look forward to the next female candidate so we can really examine what has changed and the Senator's impact on that change.

I wish I could run for office, but something tells me I had best stick to blogging :) Maybe my daughter will run...

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

It's a great letter ...

PunditMom — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:21:04 -0500

... but I fear that many will be so jaded they won't take it at face value. I hope she delivers on the promises in that letter because the stakes are too high -- read: Supreme Court -- to let McCain have even one term in the White House.

As for VP, I think it would be a mistake for Hillary to take it -- after all the trumpeting of the first viable woman presidential candidate, should that person settle into the role of a "#2?" I think she should stay in the Senate where she could do a lot more good focuing on legislation, rather than carrying someone else's water.

PunditMom, Contributing Editor for Politics & News

Also at MOMocrats & MomsRising