Obama Struggles to Woo Clinton Supporters
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, Hillary, PollsHillary Clinton may have endorsed Barack Obama, but winning over her supporters may prove more difficult for Obama than many people thought. A new CNN survey shows that the number of Clinton supporters who plan to vote for Obama has actually decreased since early June from 60% to 54%. Furthermore, 43% of Democrats now say they’d prefer Clinton to lead the ticket, up from 35% at the beginning of June.
So why are Obama’s attempts to woo Clinton supporters taking him the wrong way? Maybe certain Clinton voters are still coming to terms with the fact that a woman will not become president this year. Maybe Democrats who didn’t initially support Obama are having trouble figuring out what he stands for after the senator’s much-publicized (and overhyped) focus on center-leaning issues in recent weeks.
Whatever the reason, Obama has some work to do. I expect most Clinton voters to ultimately pull the lever for Obama but I also expect Obama’s vice presidential choice will reflect the desire to keep Democrats unified.
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 5th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Democrats, Hillary, Polls. 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.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:53 am
MWith all respect to Bill Schneider, I can’t agree with his point of view. Don’t be naive that all Hillary supporters will eventually come around on the interest of the party (many will). People who voted for Hillary had reasons not to vote for Obama at the first place. The reasons have not changed.
In recent weeks, Obama has adopted Hillary’s position, even McCain’ position, on may issues after had attacked her on the same positions in the primary. What do you think Hillary’s supporter think?
I was a Hillary supporter. I have decided that I will vote, but not vote for either Obama or McCain. Please do not educate me that the country is at stake if GOP is elected. I know that. I also know that histry has proven again and again one party’s control of three branches has always been a bad thing (this time will be the control of four branches including media).
Sadly, I have not decided which part of statistics which I want my vote in. Don’t tell me I am not a responsible voter. I want to make sure both major parties know there are people who are not happy with either one of them. This is a very responsible vote.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Figures they’d act like crybabies. But if that traitor McCain gets elected, we’ll all suffer. No more employer provided health care, ANYTHING and EVERYTHING will be labeled pre-existing under McCain’s plans, higher gas prices, more terrorist attacks, and more wars. And if you’re opposed to any of his actions or ideas, you’re UNPATRIOTIC. All because some crybabies decided not to vote.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:35 am
I’m a Hillary fan, but what I don’t understand is why are we voting for a person and NOT for the party? Obama seems to have issues with H’s supporters NOT “because Clinton remains a divisive figure in American politics and Obama’s message of change threatens to be muddled by the 16 years Clinton has spent in Washington”!! Hillary is NOT divisive, after all 18m people voted for her, as Obama. Definitely, we need to stop listening to the MEDIA…I think the real problem is that Obama is not of change, since he has changed his opinion on multiples issues/statements during this campaign up to this day…Obama could be a bit more sincere, and honest about why he’s changing opinions, so the rest of 18m could relate to him. Anyway, we need to vote for who ever represents the D party at this point, and that is Obama. Like it or not!
July 5th, 2008 at 11:32 am
The main reason I didn’t vote for Obama in the primary is the same reason I don’t want to vote for him in November. He is inexperienced and a bit selfish, if you ask me. He could have backed Hillary for president and been VP candidate. That means he could have had eight years as VP and then eight as president. Talk about great for the Democratic party and for the country! We would have had a shot at holding the White House for at least sixteen years and possibly could have started healing the country and getting back on track. But, just like G. W. Bush, he’s insisted on running for a position he’s not ready for. So, in November I get to choose between a younger version of Bush or an older version of Bush. Wow, how lucky am I?
July 5th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
I refuse to read the article. This writer, Mr. Carl, lost all credibility with me with yesterday’s paean to Jesse Helms.
However, Mr. Loofbourrow’s calling John McCain a traitor is reprehensible. I’d bet Mr. Loofbourrow never served a day. I won’t vote for McCain but he does at least a modicum of respect. Five years in the Hanoi Hilton with broken limbs call for that if nothing else does.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
From a strategy standpoint, John McCain should pick Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate. Not only does she bring a lot to the table to help him, but she could give disgruntled Hillary supporters a way to vote for a female candidate.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
The standing Republican president George W. Bush has the worst approval ratings of ANY president in the last half century. His presidency has produced a war so unpopular that it is being compared to one of the most controversial wars in US history, the Vietnam War. In addition, the Bush administration is governing in the midst of one of worst economic down turns in decades yet Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama holds only a marginal lead against Republican presidential nominee John McCain in most reputable polls.
The obvious question is, How can this be ? Well, those same analyst and news commentators, who assumed that Hillary Clinton would be the uncontested Democratic Presidential nominee, should have learned from their error. Simply put, there are NO guarantees in politics. What we are witnessing is a drastic shift in the attitudes of the American people toward politics.
It would be a drastic mistake to believe that Democrats, who support Hillary Clinton, would NOT endure another 4 years of a Republican president based on party loyalty.
The ideal that Clinton Democrats have NO choice but to support Obama is untrue.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
NObama today, NObama tomorrow, and NObama forever!!!
July 5th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
I am a Clinton supporter who cannot in all good conscience vote for a man who has “changed” his stance over and over again these last couple of weeks. Of course, he was never all that specific to begin with.
The Dems really had a chance to take back the WH this year but for some reason seem hell bent on putting up the least electable candidate they could find.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
“The main reason I didn’t vote for Obama in the primary is the same reason I don’t want to vote for him in November. He is inexperienced and a bit selfish, if you ask me. He could have backed Hillary for president and been VP candidate. That means he could have had eight years as VP and then eight as president. Talk about great for the Democratic party and for the country!”
Hillary automatically being elected to two terms and leaving office with enough popularity and voter confidence to usher in Obama’s victory in 2016 was FAR from a certainty. Both Clintons are extremely polarizing figures and the Democratic party as a whole has paid the price for this by bleeding seats in the house during the 90’s and losing the presidency in 2000.
Too many people make the mistake of assuming the political landscape will remain largely unchanged 4-8 years from the time of speculation. Obama saw his opening this year and took it. If Hillary had run 4 years ago when her country needed her, when there wasn’t a single Democratic candidate with any real name recognition or excitement behind him, she would likely be president today. Instead, she let the Dems get slaughtered in 2004 (doing extremely little campaigning for Kerry btw), and set herself up for what she thought would be a cakewalk in 2008.
Bush has become even more polarizing than Bill Clinton, and as a result the Republicans are looking to be swept out of power in a big way come November unless there are sweeping changes in the political landscape. Seeing as how Hillary is viewed favorably by around 40% of the country before even taking office, my best guess is that she would have delivered power back to the Republicans again in 4-8 years. In my view, Obama has a much better chance of unifying the country around the Democratic party and helping the party maintain a majority in both houses even after he leaves office.
But again, that’s just me trying to predict the future of the political landscape, and nothing’s certain in politics.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The notion of Hillary as a divisive figure was a media creation.
Watch out for an August surprise.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Mr. Schneider is drastically misreading Hillary supporters. This is yet another media attempt to herd us in the direction Democrats want us to go. Mr. Schneider is prodding women to fall into line “because they will listen to Sen. Clinton, who has said the stakes are too high for Democrats to sulk.” This is the same media that pretty much sat passively by while Bush & his administration laid waste to the country these past 8 years.
Mr. Schneider, Clinton supporters are not sulking. We trust our own insight, knowledge and judgment about Obama’s serious lack of experience and about what has transpired in the recent Democratic race. We’re refusing to substitute the media’s judgment for our own common sense and intelligence.
The is the same media, by the way, that worked hard to get the nomination for Obama and is now concerned that Clinton supporters may not support him in the fall. As their candidate of change shifts his positions from left to center (Hillary was criticized by the male establishment as being too “establishment” & too much to the center), Democrats are worried that all these problems might affect the election.
Hillary supporters are now being “guilt tripped” about the importance of putting aside our sulky, selfish concerns and voting for Obama. It’s even suggested in other articles that things will get much worse for women, if we don’t. I refuse to be manipulated yet again. The truth is the Democratic establishment and the media have much more to lose if Democrats don’t win in November.
If Mc Cain becomes President, it will not be the fault of Hillary supporters who refused to be railroaded into voting for Obama. The Democrats (who dismissed 18 million Clinton voters and the reaction of women across the country who watched what was done to Hillary) will be responsible for what they did, and for what they didn’t do.
As for Bill Clinton, I don’t think he has anything to apologize for. He reacted like any loving partner would at what was being done to his wife. I think that it’s one of the things he’s gotten right.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
SEEMS LIKE OBAMA IS STARTING TO REALIZE WHAT HILLARY CLINTON ALREADY KNEW AND TOLD THE COUNTRY…THAT ONE WOULD HAVE TO MOVE SLOWLY ON THE WITHDRAWAL….IT SEEMS TO ME THAT OBAMA’S WAVERING IS BRING HIM INTO THE HILLARY CLINTON CAMP…I SAY DUMP OBAMA AT THE CONVENTON AND INSTALL HILLARY CLINTON AS THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE IB HIS PLACE..AND CHOOSE OBAMA FOR THE VICE PRESIDENTIAL SLOT WHERE HE CAN GAIN EXPIRENCE FOR THE A RUN IN 2016
July 6th, 2008 at 12:12 am
“If he doesn’t pick her, a later stage of grief is depression and then acceptance,” Schneider said. “In the end I expect Clinton supporters will accept Obama, because they will listen to Sen. Clinton, who has said the stakes are too high for Democrats to sulk.”
————————————————-
Here is an excellent example of why Obama’s team is having trouble reaching people who voted for Hillary. They are blithely assuming that people will eventually “come around” to Obama instead of “sulking” because they have no choice.
I have seen this over and over again from the Obama camp, and I am not at all surprised it is backfiring. I’m only surprised it has taken this long.
Their attitude can be broken down as follows:
Example One:
1) People who voted for Hillary are liberals.
2) Liberals would rather vote for Obama than McCain.
3) Therefore, if they can’t vote for Hillary, Liberals must vote for Obama.
This ignores the fact that most voters, including most Hillary voters, consider themselves centrist. They voted for Hillary because they thought she was the best candidate, not necessarily because they agreed with every plank on the Democratic platform.
Example Two:
1) People who voted for Hillary are enchanted by her and will slavishly follow her every order.
2) Hillary has ordered them to support Obama.
3) Therefore, they must support Obama.
The fallacy here is easy to see: Hillary voters are not mindless tools of the junior Senator from New York. Most of them respect Hillary greatly, yes, but that is not the same thing as turning over their brains and consciences to her to do with as she wills. Hillary has her reasons for throwing her support to Obama: her career, her loyal Democratic core values, and so on. Her reasons, however, are not necessarily those of her supporters. Her supporters have no Democratic careers to worry about, and cannot be counted on to robotically vote the “party line.” Hillary can express her wishes for her supporters, but she has no power to compel them.
Let’s go a step further and break down Mr. Schneider’s comments:
“The later stage of grief is….” : Translation: Hillary voters are refusing to vote for Obama because they are mad and sad about Hillary not being the nominee. The reaction is entirely emotional (probably all those female and low-information voters) and they will snap out of it eventually and realize that the only sensible thing to do is vote for Obama.
Reality: Sure, some of Hillary’s supporters are mad and sad about the way she was treated by the media, the Democrats, and the Obama Campaign. But they are not “grieving,” and they will not “snap out of it.” They simply do not consider Obama a good choice for President. Time will not change that. Only Obama’s actions will change that. And in that arena, he has been busy destroying whatever appeal he had with his behavior on campaign finance, FISA, gun control, and even the odd things he’s starting to say about Iraq. Time won’t fix this problem, Mr. Schneider. Obama proving he’s a good candidate is the only thing that will. He should get busy on that immediately.
“I expect Clinton supporters will accept Obama, because they will listen to Sen. Clinton”: Translation: Again, Hillary voters = mindslaves of Hillary Clinton, because why else would they ever have voted for her? So clearly, once Hillary orders her Zombie Army to vote Obama, they will have no choice but to obey.
Reality: Hillary voters own their own votes, minds, and consciences. Hillary can make requests, she can try to coax and convince, but she most certainly cannot simply order her followers to go to the polls and vote Obama.
“the stakes are too high for Democrats to sulk.”
They are? Really? What exactly are the stakes, anyway, aside from Mr. Schneider’s continued job security? The election of Senator McCain won’t destroy the US, no matter how hysterical the Obama camp gets over the possibility. It probably won’t result in the changes I’m hoping for in my country, but neither will it destroy my country.
And then there’s the crown of the whole quote: “Sulk.” Translation: Anyone who isn’t voting for Obama is an emotional five-year-old who needs his wiser elders, like Schneider, to make him do what’s best for him, because Schneider is wiser than all of Hillary’s voters. It is impossible that Hillary voters who do not support Obama might have solid, thoughtful, well-reasoned positions on why they do not choose to support him as President. There ARE no good reasons not to support Obama, and if Hillary’s voters would just stop weeping in the corner over how their Queen has fallen, they would wake up and see that Obama and Schneider and the rest of Camp Obama only have their best interests at heart. After all, everyone knows how trustworthy and honest politicians are. Why should we doubt their wisdom and good intentions? That’s just foolishness.
Schneider does not manage to answer the most basic question here, however, which is this: Why, exactly, should Hillary voters who are centrist and not wedded to the Democrat party line, vote for Obama, when he and his people completely refuse to acknowledge that there could be real reasons why the voters are turning away from him, and persist in using words like “grieving” and “sulk” to describe voters who are doing neither of these things?
And speaking of “sulking”: The Obama Camp needs to get over themselves and put Hillary on the ticket ASAP if they want to have any hope at all of attracting her voters. It may already be too late, so if they’re serious about getting to the White House, they need to get her in position post-haste. Quite a few Hillary voters I know are sufficiently soured on Obama after his latest spree of “clarifications” (AKA, 180 degree reversals) of his positions that even adding Hillary to the ticket will no longer bring them to support him.
I myself am starting to feel that those who say Hillary should not take the VP slot if offered because she should not associate herself with the Obama Campaign might, just might, have a tiny little bit of a point.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:20 am
Why do people post in politically correct terms? It’s time for people to call a spade a spade. The list of reasons the majority of Hillary supporters, as well as the electorate will not vote for obama are:
obama’s lack of Character. (Anyone who thinks that obama running from something he approved of for over 20 years is going to help him is a fool. I would suspect once obama looses that he will also loose the support of many of his black supporters, who now vote for him by over 90% due to obama throwing his pastor and church under the bus, he could possibly end up being a man without a country)
obama’s socialist/marxist, black power racist ideology. (The press tried to keep this a secret)
obama’s playing of the race card over and over. (There are many who will not vote for this man because they see obama’s type everyday in their own walks of life. They are tired of being labeled racist because they don’t agree: with Affirmative Action, Government programs being tilted towards blacks and minorities, the legalization of illegal immigrants, and they don’t believe that obama is qualified to be POTUS.)
There is no way that obama can make up for his actions and/or change his over 20 year recorded history in a mere 6 months. The American electorate is far more astute than this.
obama is not qualified to be POTUS, no matter if the DNC did ramrod his nomination down the throat of the party electorate.
As a democrat since 1972, I have only voted once in my life for a Republican, and that was in 1980, the last time the DNC had a far left democrat as the nominee. This election cycle is shaping up to be a repeat of that Reagan landslide.
My vote will go to McCain.
Used2bdemocrat
July 6th, 2008 at 5:26 am
Loofbourrow needs to get a grip on reality, most who read these posts are educated enough to know the facts, to post scare tactics and slander does nothing to give one credibility.
Used2bdemocrat
July 6th, 2008 at 10:34 am
[...] conclude with this from Donklephant commenter Jenny responding to Alan’s last post on disaffected Clinton supporters: “I was a Hillary [...]
July 6th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Looking at these posts I consider it obvious that Hillary supporters are not emotional 5 year olds. 5 year olds are much more mature. They should admit that they don’t care one bit about what a McCain presidency would do to this country. The only important thing to them is throwing their tantrum and hurling insults at the person who won because their candidate lost.
Here’s the big fact that they will never admit to. If they succeed in their quest it will be the end of Hillary Clinton’s hopes for the presidency. What they do will be held against Clinton by the majority of the Democratic party because they rightfully will see the way she and her associates ran their campaign as contributing mightily to the blind emotional hatred being shown towards Obama and the Democratic Party. She will be held responsible for your actions, PUMAbrains, and I will be laughing at what you have done to the politician you supported and I won’t be alone.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Am I going to get in trouble if I point out that I do consider this post to be racist? I’m sorry but when I hear this level of ranting against Obama with this kind of attitude and mention of “socialist/marxist, black power racist ideology.” I can’t help but be reminded of Klan-speak.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Jim S says “Nyah nyah nyah you pumabrains – you are acting like 5 year olds. I laugh in your general direction. So there!” Hand to ears and wiggles fingers with tongue extended.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Love your comments, Annie May, Steven and Used2bdemocrat.
After giving it a lot of thought, I’ve decided to write Hillary’s name in on November’s ballot, rather than stay home or vote for McCain. If huge numbers of Hillary voters decide to do this, it will send a very powerful message. After the dust has settled, it will force the media & the Democratic establishment to privately re-evaluate what they did & the backlash it created with 18 million Hillary supporters–both women and men. And it could change the face of future elections, resulting in much more awareness on the part of the media & democratic power brokers about how both female & male candidates are treated, and in a great deal more respect for women and also for voters–if we refuse to be manipulated into voting Obama. I don’t think voting for John McCain could accomplish any of this.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Sorry Jim, I’m not affected by the immature put downs and don’t buy the guilt trip. If McCain becomes President, the media and Democratic pundits who created this mess will be responsible, not me or anyone else who decides to vote for Hillary in November. I’m not willing to be blackmailed or bullied into substituting your viewpoint, or the media’s or ANY of the pundit’s viewpoints, for my own, come November. The media & pundits pushed the public to go for a very inexperienced candidate for the nomination, despite the absolutely critical need for a solidly experienced and skilled President for the next 8 years.
I’ve been working for democratic candidates and causes for years. I study the issues, read to stay on top of what’s happening and why its happening, etc. I–we all–have the right to make up our own minds & do what we think is best, given the larger picture. I’ve given my honest viewpoint and I treat others with respect & expect the same from you. If you’re willing to discuss things in a mature, intelligent way, then discussion is a good thing. If you can only resort to put downs, name calling & dismissal of views that are different from yours, etc., then you deserve to be ignored.
Best to you.
July 7th, 2008 at 8:49 am
No, mw, that’s not quite it. They are the ones who are claiming that they are not being vindictive, that their decision to vote for a Republican who is the antithesis of what the candidate they say they support stands for has some kind of rational basis. As for the 5 year old comment…
Or did you not read that in your attempt to simplify what I said? Of course you didn’t. And if you think my comments concerning the PUMAbrains and their lack of emotional maturity comes solely from this thread you’re just not paying attention. Not surprising.
July 7th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Carol,
It is not the Hillary supporters who refuse to vote this November or who want to write her name in that I refer to as emotionally immature, though yes, some of them are. I’ve been to their web sites. I’ve read their vicious characterizations of Obama and anyone who supports his candidacy. It is those who in their vindictiveness towards Obama plan on voting for McCain that raise my ire. In their hatred for the fellow Democrat who defeated Hillary, they are willing to cast their vote for a Republican who in no way is a centrist on the vast majority of the issues facing this country. He is in fact a continuation of the Bush policies on most of them. No, no real Democrat can vote for McCain on the issues. This is a lie. They should immediately change their party affiliation and start their petitions for a constitutional amendment to allow GWB to have a third term if they fall for that.
That having been said, it is not the fault of the DNC, the media or any pundits that Hillary Clinton lost. Initially I had no idea who I was going to vote for. But Hillary ran an incompetent campaign and I found many things her campaign did insulting. That’s the long and short of it. Her staff was not only incompetent but alienating. I’ve been voting Democratic since the social conservatives took over the Republican Party and shoved me out of my Independent registration because there are no longer any Republicans I can vote for. But every time I saw Howard Wolfson on the air I thought of Karl Rove. In the end in a close call I voted for Obama. I didn’t see the rampant sexism you claim existed. I didn’t see some massive push for Obama until after Hillary’s mistakes mounted and mounted to make her weaknesses as a candidate obvious. You say that you respect others and their viewpoints. Most of those sharing your viewpoint don’t. It doesn’t take much research to know that.
They scream that Hillary won the popular vote. She didn’t. Not unless you want to ignore the votes of those who live in caucus states. Who would be subverting democracy then? Did you really love the comments of used2bdemocrat as he accused Obama of being a Marxist racist? Where is the respect and maturity in that? Where is your respect for your fellow citizens in your belief that they were simple minded enough to be pushed around by the evil MSM and pundits? Frankly, it sounds much more like what I’m used to hearing from Republicans than Democrats. But I’m used to that from the Hillary camp dead-enders by now. If you expect me to treat your opinions with respect re-think what you’re saying and what the people you associate with are acting like first.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Carol, Annie May, Steven and Used2bdemocrat — You all rock! Your comments are right on, and I agree with you all.
I would just add that Bill Schneider seems to be a nice man, but since he’s probably been in the tank for Obama with all of the other cable media pundits, he hasn’t a clue as to how Clinton supporters feel, or what they will do in November. And, they don’t all vote as a block, either. I find it fascinating that the latest polls show support for Obama from Clinton supporters dropping.
Jim S: See, the thing is, Clinton people are distinquished by having good, intelligent minds of their own. They are NOT like the mindless swooning, swaying Obama groupies! In fact, the very cult-like nature of the Obama movement makes lots of us virtually GAG.
So, we Clinton supporters do expect fireworks, and maybe a big surprise in Denver at the Dem convention. Believe it… By then, it will be very obvious that Obama is tanking.
If Obama is the nominee after the convention, some Clinton supporters may vote for him in November. Some may vote for McCain, some may write in Hillary’s name, and some may just stay home. But, here’s the thing: WE ALL RESPECT EACH OTHER’S RIGHT TO DO WITH HIS/HER VOTE WHAT HE/SHE WISHES! WE RESPECT EACH OTHER’S RIGHT TO NOT BUY WHAT THE DNC IS SELLING!!! WE CLINTON SUPPORTERS ARE NOT ROBOTS!
We deeply resent people like Jim S calling us names because we don’t plan to fall in line with the brown-shirt troops. There are far, far worse things than Obama not winning in November!!! (Actually, lots of us shudder to think of his inexperienced self in the White House.)
Take the pledge at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/pledge-to-vote-against-obama-in-the-general-election
July 7th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
“We deeply resent people like Jim S calling us names because we don’t plan to fall in line with the brown-shirt troops.”
Somewhat contradictory, I’d say. You dislike being “called names” but trot the hatred right out towards those with the temerity to disagree with you. You resent people who question your reasoning in still opposing the nominee of the party you claim to support to the extent that you claim that anyone who supports him is doing so from some cult like devotion. Well, I do not respect people who call themselves Democrats, say that they are still Democrats but because Clinton didn’t win they’re voting for McCain. Don’t expect me to consider them emotionally mature, thoughtful people. I certainly can’t consider them honest.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Jim,
I agree and hope that Democrats won’t vote for McCain in November. I hope that Hillary supporters will write her name in on the ballot.
While there may be some who are, most people who support Hillary over Obama, are not racists. Like me, they see that Obama doesn’t yet have the experience to meet the challenges to begin repairing the damage done by Bush. I’ve never condoned or supported racism, and was initially happy that a black could finally successfully run for president. But, right now, that isn’t enough of a reason for me to vote for Obama, given his experience & the state of the country.
I, too, have seen racism on the blogs, from both sides. (I’ve seen racism & gloating & arrogance toward whites, as well, from quite a few Obama supporters).
I disagree–the DNC and the media played an enormous part in what happened in this campaign and what happened to Hillary. If you didn’t see the sexism, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Millions of women, Hillary voters and men saw it and have spoken up about it. Telling us we’re “crazy’ (i.e., it didn’t really happen) doesn’t add anything to the discussion or change the reality of what we saw go down.
I’m white and while I’ve consciously worked to see and imagine what it must be like to grow up in a racist culture, as much as I empathize, I will never understand what that’s like from the inside out, unless I experience it. And I think the same is true for many men who simply don’t recognize or understand sexism, because they haven’t experienced it. In a racist culture, there’s a built-in denial in the dominant (white) culture that works to ensure the continuation of racism. The same is true for sexism. There’s a built-in denial of the dominant (male) culture to ensure the perpetuation of misogyny. For men who haven’t experienced it, you don’t really get how much damage it does, not only to women, but to the self-limiting, screwed up, skewed way the world is run. Some men do, but most men choose not to see sexism. While I haven’t personally experienced racism, I have all my life experienced sexism, as have almost all women; it does exist and it did affect this election, Jim, whether you, or others, see it or want to admit it.
While mistakes may have been made in Hillary’s campaign, Obama certainly made many mistakes as well, and by the way, continues to make them. From my view, that is not why Hillary lost.
I don’t agree with or support anyone’s comments about Obama being a Marxist racist. I’m sorry, I missed that.
Hillary supporters deserve a whole lot more respect than they have, or are now getting, and that’s why there’s such a problem. Please don’t make the assumption that we’re all a bunch of racists. We’re not. But we are 18 million strong and we do have the right to be heard & listened to. We don’t agree that Obama is the right candidate for President at this point in time. Like Pico above, (see comments) I wish Obama had backed Hillary for president. He could have become VP & run for President in 8 years, after he’d gained the solid experience needed to provide the leadership the country requires for a long time to come, to get us out of the unholy mess we’re in now. That would have been putting the country’s needs first and Obama’s needs second, and would have been, in my opinion, what’s best for the country & for the Democratic party. None of the problems we’re now experiencing would exist and a Democrat could have served as President for decades to come.
Instead, the DNC and the media thought they could continue business-as-usual and continue to get away with the sexism that drove this election. Maybe (we can only hope) we’ve reached one of those critical turning points in time, when a major shift in the culture takes place. I hope, and would like to think, that this election may well have triggered such a shift that, long term, will further our evolution as human beings and result in the beginning of the end of sexism and racism as a driving force in our culture.
But, short term, what may well happen now is that McCain will get the Presidency by default (because we haven’t made greater progress in eradicating both sexism and racism).
I don’t know if you are black, and I won’t make that assumption. I know if I was a black male, I might very well agree with your viewpoint. But I’m neither.
July 7th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I’m not black and I never thought that a significant number of Hillary supporters are racist. The only one that I consider to be so is the one who posted that. Yes, there are 18,000,000 people who voted for Hillary. But I don’t buy into the claim that she had the real majority. Not when everyone who voted in the primaries and took part in the caucuses is counted, she didn’t. We will just have to disagree on the role of media and pundits. In addition I didn’t see the tidal wave of sexism that Clinton supporters feel was unleashed on her.
I do feel that Obama will do more than you think to repair the damage Bush has done because I do not underestimate the strength that a mastery of the bully pulpit can give a President and I do not think that Obama will misuse it like Bush abused his ability to reach out to those Americans who think that having an “average guy” in the White House is a good thing.
In addition I think the attitude being shown by many Hillary supporters can do nothing but damage her prospects in 2012 if you are right and McCain wins. I was not happy with her campaign or her more vocal supporters. I did think that she could recover from it if her concession was graceful and she definitely met my expectations in that area. But then PUMA and the like began their slime Obama campaigns. If they succeed in their goal to deny Obama the presidency it won’t be pretty in 2012 when they try and claim what they think is their right to have Hillary as the nominee. Because what they’ve done in 2008 won’t have been forgotten.