Ok, look, everyone, I have said it over and over. You never wanted to hear it. You still don't, but we needed Hillary Clinton to decisively win in November. You do not get a much more ardent supporter of Clinton than I was. I have supported her issues and passions for 16 years. I remember my "I'm for Hillary's Husband" button affixed to my shirt with pride in '92. Now, with the news that 27% of her voters report they will vote for McCain, we need to stop being angry at people who wanted her and learn how to win them over or keep them in our camp.
I am one of those voters who is deeply saddened, disappointed, and still a bit angry, for Hillary Clinton should have been our nominee. However--and it is a huge however, so all you Democrats, bare with me here--I want Obama/Biden to win in November. See, Hillary had it right in her speech at the convention the other night. When she said, "Were you really in this just for me..." it became clear--this is an issues campaign. If we want to win, we have to keep the debate centered on the issues that matter most. I was and am for Hillary Clinton, but I am for the issues she stood for even more.
With the latest news that Sarah Palin is John McCain's running mate, we have to tread very carefully or we will lose...not just lose, but lose soundly. We will not just lose the election, but we will lose the gains we have made for women and men who support women and their rights.
It will become far too easy to try to attack Palin for being "inexperienced" or "only chosen because she is a woman." We cannot win (the election or the larger goal of equality) if we try to tear her down through gendered stereotypes and constructions. Already I have heard (and the news is only 2 hours old), from Democrats, "How could he pick someone so inexperienced?" Well, we say Obama has enough, right? Well, Palin has governed and run a state. She has enough.
I have already heard from a Democrat that "she has 5 children, one with special needs, so why is she not at home with that 4 month old child?" We, as Democrats, do not want to win by becoming arachaic, fundamentalist and sexist. We will push those who already feel slighted by the loss of Hillary Clinton further into the McCain camp. And in the long run, we will devastate what we have fought for with regards to women and equality.
Here is how we, Democrats, liberals, and progressives, win. Keep it to the issues. Period.
Obama/Biden needs to treat Palin with respect (as they wisely did to McCain at the convention by saluting him as a hero and honorable man), but then drive home ISSUES incessantly. It's quite simple... we all, staffers for Obama, men for Obama, women for Obama, all of us need to keep this to the issues and we can win.
Palin is a social conservative. There are clear, distinct differences between the two campaigns, between the two presidential candidates and between the two veeps. Dig in, focus on the differences on the issues, and beat them down.
We just need to push this question: Do we want someone who will DO and CARE about those less fortunate, those like us, those who work hard and deserve a shot? Do we want someone who will fight for health care, our troops, our jobs, and equality for all people?
Or, do we want a pair who will fight for more money for those who already have plenty and who will fight for the rights of white, straight men and unborn zygotes? Do we really want no changes in health care, the war, and the way we are viewed by everyone else in the world?
Do we want to capitalize on the promise of our country, or do we want to continue to give in to fear of progress?
What do we want as a people?
We Want Change.
Keep it there. Drive it home. We have hope. We want America to be what it CAN be for everyone if we just elect Barack Obama and Joseph Biden.
Keep it simple, and keep it true to who we are.
16 comments:
Great stuff, Love of My Life.
My own, hopefully just as logical and impassioned, political essay is brewing and brewing in my head. I hope it will all come out the way I want it to, and that I will get it posted soon.
I know we were scared this morning when word broke that McCain selected Palin as his veep. But our fear was fueled by one thing we failed to think of: just how little anyone knows about Sarah Palin. As more information filtered through the news wires, I stopped being scared and became invigorated. There are very clear contradictions at play that we can now expose, and if we all do it just right--that's you, me, other liberals and progressives, Barack, Joe, Hillary, etc.--we can topple the Republican ticket as clearly and powerfully as we always wanted.
Whenever and whatever I read in the blogosphere, I look for chinks, cracks and questions to raise. In this essay, I find no weaknesses to exploit. I'm passing by....
I'm glad to find this site. And glad you started it. And I hope you find an alternative default color for your main text's font. It's hard to read.
(Please erase this comment after reading, because it's off topic, undeniably!)
I'll pause long enough to unburden myself about Sara Palin.
As I have said before with respect to vice-presidents:
Presidential candidates select veeps to balance their ticket if they are not confident of winning; Presidential candidates select veeps to help them govern for their first four years if they are confident of victory.
That is why I argued long and hard for Obama to select a member of the Democratic Party's varsity to help him govern. Obama is the most over qualified candidate in this generation, objectively. And he is paired against the second least qualified candidate of this generation.
I would say that McCain's selection of Sara Whatshername is indicative of neither of the above: she is neither intended to balance the ticket (like Huckabee or Romney) nor help him govern (like Lieberman). I would argue that Sara-X's selection reflects a third agenda: Richard Viguerie, et. al. of the inner circle of the GOP king-makers forced McCain to take her in order to maintain the purity of their basic First Principles (that's what they call them) for the next four years. In other words, The McCain ticket is not supposed to be a competitive ticket. It's a composite of McCain's vanity + the GOP politburo happy to have some old self-absorbed fool serve as a place-holder for them.
The GOP is always toward the long term: Let the Dems take the blame for national bankruptacy and international defeat so they can retake the White House when they have rebuilt their brand.
Is is possible for McCain to win? Sure. Barack Obama could implode like John Edwards. Is that likely?
One thing is sure, in my view: Obama and his supporters have to be fixed on one fact. McCain is not Barack's greatest adversary. It's only the punks, pimps and prostitutes in the main stream media who can beat Barack Obama.
But I digress.....
Again, OT: Please participate in my National (Un-Scientific) Bumper Sticker Poll? (Thanks!)
Yes!
Keep it there. Drive it home. We have hope. We want America to be what it CAN be for everyone if we just elect Barack Obama and Joseph Biden.
Keep it simple, and keep it true to who we are.
Yes, now that I am sober, I can address this column on its terms.
I agree with McK's pounding on the issues, ideas, and policies. The difference are great and enough gold is to be found in those peaks and valleys to justify almost all of our energies. Palin's inexperience is clear to all and does not need the attention many are giving it. Her views are the most critical deal-breaker.
And may I enter one more pissy comment about the phony issue of Commander-in-Chief? When I voted for Al Gore and John Kerry, I was not voting for my CIC. I was voting for a president. If I were in the armed forces, I would have a CIC. I'm fed up with hearing about who's fit to be a CIC and who's not. If we make a good presidential selection (for a change) we won't to have a war-time decider.
K. You've written a really excellent essay. I especially agree with your comment:
I have already heard from a Democrat that "she has 5 children, one with special needs, so why is she not at home with that 4 month old child?" We, as Democrats, do not want to win by becoming arachaic, fundamentalist and sexist.
You have the right ideas, the right strategy and the right mindset if Barack Obama is to win.
vigilante, I strongly disagree with several parts of your analysis. But I actually have a little inside knowledge about the McCain VP pick. Trust me, this was completely McCain's choice. And it is a choice I heartedly endorse!!!
But this is clearly the wrong forum to go into those discussions and I will be writing a longer essay over at my house later with my points of view.
Alas I am traveling until Tuesday and my laptop has decided to go on the blink!!! I've borrowed this one from a friend, mostly to honor K.'s invitation and drop by to read her essay.
Can and will Obama still win? Absolutely. Will Democrat's sacrifice their principles to do it? It's a huge risk.
Thank you everyone who has written so far. I am honored.
I will say, Vig, that I think you bring up really important points about why/how Veeps are picked, but I think you may be off a bit on Palin. She was chosen to offset, to balance. See, McCain is not conservative enough for conservatives. He, to them, is too centrist and moderate (they are dumb, ok?)... so the Palin pick was to appease the far right. She will appease the evangelicals who want a strong christian influence. She is extremely pro-gun, "pro-life" (I have to put it in quotes because I believe I am pro-life as a pro-choice person), pro-drilling, you name it.
Her anti-environment, anti-animal, anti-woman, (I could go on and on here) appeals greatly to those who see McCain as a "maverick," who seem him as a person who is not religious nor "controlled" by the right.
She was not picked because he needed to prove she could be CIC (I loved that discussion here too), but because she DOES balance their ticket in the minds of those who never thought McCain was extreme enough.
But because she is a woman, she "softens" that message. Let's hope Biden (one of the loves of my life) pushes her to open up all the hate she has in her heart during the debate for people to see.
Palin has no "hate in her heart."
I claim support for my position from the NYT: Advisers Say Conservative Ire Pushed McCain Away From Picking Lieberman
For weeks, advisers close to the campaign said, Mr. McCain had wanted to name as his running mate his good friend Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democrat turned independent. But by the end of last weekend, the outrage from Christian conservatives over the possibility that Mr. McCain would fill out the Republican ticket with Mr. Lieberman, a supporter of abortion rights, had become too intense to be ignored.
With time running out, and after a long meeting with his inner circle in Phoenix, Mr. McCain finally picked up the phone last Sunday and reached Ms. Palin at the Alaska State Fair. Although the campaign’s polling on Mr. McCain’s potential running mates was inconclusive on the selection of Ms. Palin — virtually no one had heard of her, a McCain adviser said — the governor, who opposes abortion, had glowing reviews from influential social conservatives.
This reinforces the thrust of my first comment above: Palin was forced upon McCain.
I never said she might not be forced upon him, rather, I meant that she was chosen (or a forced choice) based on balancing the ticket.
Your research here proves us both right. People saw his first choice as too moderate. People already (falsely) see McCain as moderate; therefore, the ticket needed "balance"--someone to appeal to those on the other end of their party.
Did any of you see Maher Friday night? I will blog about it soon. He is doing EXACTLY what I said we democrats cannot do. Idiot.
Wizard,
What I mean is this... if you are not for the rights of others (blacks, women, gays etc--and I have not learned the scope of her stances yet), then somewhere, you must have disdain, disrespect or even hate in your heart.
Otherwise, why would you stand in the way of other people's pursuit of freedom and happiness?
Administrator, Puleeeeze change the color of your font? (My eyes are strained enough as it is!)And please delete this OT comment after you read it? Thanks!
Where we differ, J McK, is I don't feel this is how McCain, left to his own devices, would have determined to 'balance his ticket' in order win. What I'm saying is that Palin was forced upon McCain by social conservatives because they are primarily concerned (as always) not with winning, but with retaining the purity of the party's bloodlines for the next four years. McCain-Palin is intended as a place-holder. That's not to say they couldn't end up as contenders, but only if Team-Obama badly plays it's winning hand. And, of course - as always - the mercurial MSM is the wild card in the deck!
K., I remain so impressed with your blog entry that I have used it as the centerpiece of my own blog entry on Palin, prepared just moments ago: Vice President Sarah Palin? I Like It!
I have long maintained that Hillary should have been the VP pick. I like Biden but Hillary would have made me a lot more comfortable about the outcome of this race.
Post a Comment