![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well, I'm getting ready to go vote (have to do an absentee ballot because I'll be in a Red Cross training session all day Saturday, the primary day). Being here this week has been interesting. Yesterday I got a computerized phone call from some jerk in Texas with a long list of scurrilous "facts" about Hilary--none related to her ability to be President, all more suited to some unwatchable soap opera. Does anybody believe those things? Well, yes--that's how Bush defeated McCain here in 2000.
On the other hand, this NYT Op-Ed piece is quite close to my feeling about a real problem in her campaign.
It's a hard decision. It's quite true that the policy differences between HRC and Obama aren't big enough to influence me, so the question is really who can win, and if he/she wins, who can lead?
And beyond that, I really think, what's the narrative you identify with? A lot of my friends are really into the Hilary storyline, not just the one about second chances and redemption that Collins mentions in that piece, but I think also into the Woman's Turn At Last trope. But in my life, my mother was the person in our family who made it in the outside world, got jobs only men had had previously, and blazed a trail I've only followed, not so well. So, while I truly believe in the need for more opportunity and power for women in a rational way, I'm not so captivated by that tale. For me, child of civil rights marches and the days of MLK, the compelling story is the wearing down of racist policies, and so finally the idea of a black president is the one that touches me.
I don't mean this to be a political argument, just an observation about how we (or I, for one) see the political drama today.
And interesting that the two traditional white guys, both with some ideas I really like, seem to be out of the story altogether.
On the other hand, this NYT Op-Ed piece is quite close to my feeling about a real problem in her campaign.
It's a hard decision. It's quite true that the policy differences between HRC and Obama aren't big enough to influence me, so the question is really who can win, and if he/she wins, who can lead?
And beyond that, I really think, what's the narrative you identify with? A lot of my friends are really into the Hilary storyline, not just the one about second chances and redemption that Collins mentions in that piece, but I think also into the Woman's Turn At Last trope. But in my life, my mother was the person in our family who made it in the outside world, got jobs only men had had previously, and blazed a trail I've only followed, not so well. So, while I truly believe in the need for more opportunity and power for women in a rational way, I'm not so captivated by that tale. For me, child of civil rights marches and the days of MLK, the compelling story is the wearing down of racist policies, and so finally the idea of a black president is the one that touches me.
I don't mean this to be a political argument, just an observation about how we (or I, for one) see the political drama today.
And interesting that the two traditional white guys, both with some ideas I really like, seem to be out of the story altogether.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
Me too. I would take almost any of the Democrats, but he seems to be what I think this country needs most. Plus I fear that if Clinton is nominated, the hatred that so many Republicans have for her husband, will mean no party crossover votes. I have no idea what the crossovers for Obama would be.
But, with that, the most important thing is to have a Democrat president, no matter who it is, because this country cannot go down the path the Republicans have taken them, and seem to be taking them, specifically Huckabeee. Amazing when McCain seems the sanest.
From:
no subject
Absolutely. I will definitely put in some telephone time for MoveOn once the real election starts. I'd even travel to a contested state to work for the Dem candidate.
McCain seems to be doing well in Florida, though....or maybe I missed some recent news. Will google. And then there's Feb. 5, which will probably really tell the tale, I think.
From:
no subject
That and... well, how to put this, whoever goes in is going to have a truly horrible term. War, economy in crisis, lack of confidence in us abroad, the list is trillions of debt long.
To effectively get our act together, we need some purple state action, where blue or red get something done as opposed to polarizing like polecats.
Even if H. Clinton does get into the white House, what I fear is spending another four years hearing about the private lives of presidents and not dealing with the real problems. And Bill certainly isn't helping on the score.
From:
no subject
The purple people need to take their country back. The days of red and blue should be long gone. That isn't good for anyone, but I doubt they see it that way.
what I fear is spending another four years hearing about the private lives of presidents
She certainly would experience that, given her husband's past. And his current use in the campaign will ramp that up if she gets the nomination.
From:
no subject
Links to segments on each of the Democrats are also available on the station's website (http://www.wnyc.org/vote2008/). I'm going to put the individual links in my LJ, along (I hope) w/a report of a conversation w/a congressman I ran into at an unrelated event yesterday, although I tend to be pretty bad about getting that sort of thing written up.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Why doesn't anyone point out that supply side economics didn't work, won't work and is stupid? I haven't heard anyone question the need for continued tax breaks.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Your rationale makes sense to me.
From:
no subject
Yes--unfortunately, not so on the other side!
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
You know that originally it worked that way--not with primaries but with the whole thing, so there would be a president from one party and vice-pres from the other, except that I don't think they really had parties back then.
From:
no subject
Between the remaining two, I think either will make a competent executive, but my money, for the moment, is with Obama, for two big reasons: First, and foremost, forget Bill-- Hillary is enough of a polarizing figure on her own that she's not going to do any good in healing the tribalism that has emerged since the Republican Revolution, and that mindset is the real danger in our politics today. Even if Clinton weren't so polarizing, I don't think she has the right attitude to change that problem, and I think Obama does. Second, I may be alarmist, but this is the first presidential election where there will be voters who have lived their entire lives under a president named either Bush or Clinton. It's far too easy for people to settle back into their dynastic ways, and I'd just as well like to see that stop before it starts.
From:
no subject