Why People Will Vote Against Hillary
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, HillarySully gets an email and it pretty much sums it up…
I live in Las Vegas, Saturday was my first caucus. I went to support Obama, requiring changing registration from independent to Democrat. I brought 18 voters including friends and family. All Obama supporters. Early in the campaign most of us thought we’d hope for Obama now and still vote for Hillary in November if she wins the nomination. Not now. No chance. We got the Barack-bashing phone calls. We got bullied by out-of-state Hillary workers at the caucus site telling us we were “on the dark side of the party”. We’ve seen Bill Clinton all over the local news looking more like a Karl Rove political hack than a distinguished former president. We’ve seen them try to destroy the local party and unions. In the fall if she’s on the ballot it’s not just blacks who will stay home. I know 19 white people who showed up today but won’t be there in the general election. And if we do it’ll be for McCain or Bloomberg.
Hmmm…if it’s Hillary vs. Mitt will Bloomberg run? I know I’d consider voting for a 3rd party in that case. In fact, it would be a godsend.
I guess we’ll see…
This entry was posted on Sunday, January 20th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Hillary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 20th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Yeah and you sound representative of normal Americans. Not.
January 20th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
I’m a normal American *woman*, and I wouldn’t vote for Hillary. The woman is not genuine, and if she won, it would be business as usual- kook-left ideas trying to be shoved through while kook-right stalwarts do everything they can to halt the process. In short, nothing gets done.
And while I would still get out and vote for someone it IS becoming “normal” in America to just stay home on Election Day if there are no candidates you like.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
I’m a registered Independent, and I’ve decided for Obama, partly because of what’s been displayed by Hillary in this campaign. And my back-up candidate, should she win the Democratic nomination via the viciousness she’s displayed thus far, is McCain.
January 21st, 2008 at 12:19 am
My first three criteria for presidential candidates have always been:
[1] Not another Clinton (that rules out Hillary, whose own character, as revealed in this campaign, hardly helps her case for the nomination),
[2] Not another Bush (luckily Jeb’s not in this race), and
[3] No one that reminds me too much of either Presidents Clinton or Bush the younger (that rules out Edwards on the Dem side and Huckabee on the GOP).
So, in spite of my lingering reservations about Obama, he’s my preferred Dem candidate, albeit only by default.
January 21st, 2008 at 9:51 am
I am getting really sick and tired of hearing this from both sides. First of all, it is childish. Second of all, it wont change anyone’s vote. Third of all, it is an abdication of your solemn obligation as a citizen. If you sit out the election or vote Republican in the fall you are allowing the next supreme court justice to be a conservative,joining the 4 ubber conservatives just waiting for the fifth so they can undo a lot of what has been accomplished in the last 40 years. One of the most important powers of the president is to appoint members of the third co-equal branch. The court hangs in the balance for the next few decades. Our duty, if we are Dems or progressives, is to make sure a Dem appoints the next justice. Period. End of debate.
So, to you all who are doing the “I wont vote for her” thing, as I hear some of her people say “I wont vote for him”, I say you are all not progressives nor friends of progressives, and you are prepared to let the Supreme Court go solidly conservative out of a snit. I dont believe that comports well with your duty as a citizen at this particular time. I find that abdication of responsibility to be part of the problem, not part of the solution.
And for the guy who will vote for McCain because HRC is to “vicious”, you really dont know McCain very well. At least Hillary doesnt erupt into profanity laden expletive bomb dropping explosions of anger in public when opposed (do your research into the way McCain has comported himself in the Senate at times.).
Its been so long since we have had a truly wide open nominating process, I dont think that most people doing political blogging or their commentators, can take it, to be honest.
But if, to you, its an acceptable exercise of your duties as a citizen to sit it out, or vote Repub, so be it. Just be fully aware of the consequences of your actions, because there will be consequences and you wont be able to blame those consequences on anyone named Clinton.
January 21st, 2008 at 10:43 am
Jammer,
The Dems will have an expanded majority in both the Senate and the House after 2008. It is even possible for the Dems to get to a 60 vote plurality in the Senate, although I expect they will fall just short. Nominees for the Supreme court must be approved by the Senate and regardless of who is President, the Dems are not going to permit the appointment of an “uber conservative”. Finally, McCain was a key part of the infamous “gang of 14″ that forced the GWB to compromise on Federal judge appointments. Your fears about Supreme court appointments are unfounded, particularly under a McCain presidency. In fact, if McCain does not get the Republican nomination, it may be because the ragged right has never forgiven him for his compromise on Federal judges.
January 21st, 2008 at 11:06 am
Justin,
I have routinely been dismissive of your calls for a third party, because of the overwhelming historical evidence that they cannot succeed. They always act as a spoiler with 3rd party supporters having the effect of electing the greater of two evils (from the 3rd party supporter perspective - Perot supporters elected Clinton, Nader supporters elected Bush43). Even Teddy Roosevelt, a wildly popular nationally known populist ex-president, could succeed only in getting a plurality over the candidate of the Republican Party he abandoned, and threw the election to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Bloomberg is no Teddy Roosevelt.
That said… I may be coming around to your way of thinking, because I think it very well maybe a Hillary - Romney election that will pull Bloomberg in.
If Bloomberg is sincere about offering a real alternative to politics as usual, he can dramatically increase his credibility and the probability of success by driving and funding it from the VP role, and putting a true national figure with more credible qualifications at the top of the ticket. Chuck Hagel comes to mind.
The last historical example of a new party securing the presidency is Abe Lincoln, which is a valid historical precedent (sort of). However, it is instructive to note that the Republican Party did not emerge as a third party. It emerged as a second party, as an alternative to the Democrats, and formed out of the ashes of the Whig party which self-immolated over the issue of slavery. It appears to me that the Republican Party has been dousing itself with gasoline this entire primary season, and all they need to do is nominate a Hucklebee or Romney to light the match. If the Republican party self-destructs, it very well might create room for successful new party.
January 21st, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Obviously its hard for an average American to see a women be our president. But its not a bad thing to hope for. I just voted for her on “The Leagues” Facebook page. Surprisingly most of my tow n voted for her too. O yea you also can see what issues your town caress about the most. Heres the link Apps.facebook.com/theleague
January 30th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
[...] Why people will vote against Hillary (Donkelephant) [...]