Another advantage she’ll have over Obama in the general election is that she voted to go to war initially. Remember, for all the Americans who are wondering when we’re ever going to discover an exit strategy now, the majority were highly in favor of the war in the wake of 9/11. Not that I think that was a good choice on her part, but she is in a much better position to portray herself as mainstream, practical, and experienced than Obama is.
I know it’s disappointing to Obama supporters and to people who have bumper stickers that say both “U.S. Out of Iraq” and “Free Tibet” (and lack the ability to see the irony therein), but the fact is the majority of Americans are not in favor of socialist policies modeled after those in Canada and Europe. There’s a reason the majority of labor unions have endorsed Clinton. Even those liberal voters who feel that if the CEO of their company can make $85 billion this year, surely the company should be able to afford to pay its workers a fair wage with good benefits, are generally opposed to collectivism. When Clinton stops trying to act like she’s a hundred miles left of the far left to compete with Obama, she’ll go back to being about a foot left of center right along with the majority of the rest of the Democrats, a number of independents, and even a few good Republicans.
And here’s where all my left-leaning idealistic friends (i.e. those who are nicer than me) say, “See! That’s why we hate her! She just says anything to win!”
I’m sorry to say this to those who don’t get it, but she’s a politician – that’s her job. And I know this news will make some weep, but Obama just says anything he’s told to say in hopes of winning, too. As does McCain. Sadly, in political elections we have no choice but to vote for a politician – unless you want to write in Frank Zappa. You may not like Clinton’s politics, but don’t tell me she isn’t good at her job.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - McClum
Unfortunately Frank Zappa died several years ago leaving an empty space of creativity unfilled.
In tough times like this we need to go in a new direction and elect leaders who are willing to risk their political carriers by opening our minds to the possibilities of a future that other politicians are not willing to talk about for fear of losing an election.
Only one candidate is taking the risk of being thoughtful and honest with us. Only one candidate respects us enough to not shy away from being as honest and thoughtful as he can.
I'm ready for a change in the tone and the quality of our national discourse. I'm ready for a leader that thinks on a grand scale. Someone who does not try to buy my vote with stupid little tax cut ideas.
Let's vote like adults so we can get our country back on track. Think people, where do you want our country to be in 20 or 50 years?
Barack Obama is the best candidate to lead us in a new direction.
2 - dee
Just want to point out a couple laughable things in this rather dull piece of writing... the title I found funny, Democrats are already choosing who they want, and so far they have chosen Barack... the only way Hillary gets chosen, is in an undemocratic way, with the party as*holes, excuse me, party elders, GIVING it to her via the superdelegates, to try to claim that she will be chosen if she is given the nomination is quite laughable... as far as who has the better chance of winning I think you are way off... no one with negatives as high as Hillary has or can win the general... its that simple... she got us into Iraq also, I can't vote for her on that issue alone... you try to claim that that will be a positive for her... give me a break... Hillary was a big part of her husband's administration?? what the f*ck is that crap? You sound just like the Hildebeast herself! There is absolutely no evidence of her doing anything in her husbands administration except to push for the passage of NAFTA that ultimately kills American jobs and hurts Americans... hardly the type of "experience" that we need or that I would cite as a positive... Don't just claim something, back it up with evidence... Also, because two republicans you talked to think that Obama will be easier to beat then that should influence us to pick Hil? What kind of logic is this? Who cares what registered republicans think, they are dummies... I will note vote for Hillary if she gets the nod through shady means, but Barack will definately get my vote... I'm an independent. Go away Hillary, no more of these dynasty families... Save the country, vote for Obama... can't wait to see Barack debate old angry man McCain..
3 - Cindy D
"Remember, for all the Americans who are wondering when we’re ever going to discover an exit strategy now, the majority were highly in favor of the war in the wake of 9/11."
I think these same American's are likely to hold their representatives to a higher standard (as insiders) than they hold themselves. After all, the average American relied on what they heard and saw. Their representatives being insiders in the political process would be expected to guide them and protect their interests (based on their greater knowledge), I would think.
Time will tell if people are disillusioned enough with the "mainstream" and with ideas that are "similar to McCain’s" to want something better.
I don't have very much faith in people to overcome the lifetime of indoctrination we have all experienced that leads to voting for media-elected front-runners. But, at some point people will have had enough and maybe we'll have a change.
Maybe there are enough of us now that are opposed to the direction we are heading.
I'm voting for Obama.
4 - Andrew McDerry
Good article. I am definitely voting for Clinton. She is the one who is promosing the most comprehensive health care plan out there people.
It might be nice if some people supporting Obama would stop their ferocious diatribes just because the Messiah can feel the ground shaking beneath his feet. Obama is a good man but I just don't think he is president material.
No offense, but I would seriously consider voting for McCain in a match up with Obama. McCain is already not a far-right nut job like Bush, and if he can propose a good program, I might just prefer that over a stale "yes we can" and Mr. JR "the Bombastic" Wrighteous...
Gees, how did he stay in that church for 20 years and got married to a woman who said on national TV that she had never been proud of this country?? There is no way I am voting for Obama - no way...
5 - bliffle
There are several weak premises in this argument, one of which is the supposed residual pro-war sentiment of many US citizens. I think the pro-war sentiment is decreasing every day, altho many formerly pro-war people may publicly support the war, nevertheless in the privacy of the voting booth they will express their antipathy to the war. That's the way it was with Vietnam.
And Hillary bears an extra burden on this issue because she not only voted for the war she didn't perform due diligence before the vote. She was careless and reckless and, at least seemingly, chose the most politically efficacious vote.
6 - Mooja
CEO's make 85 billion a year now? I had no idea.
7 - Dan Miller
Staci,
As I understand your article, Senator Clinton should get the Democrat nomination because she is better adept at appealing to the masses, has a better chance of spinning her ideas to look more similar to McCain’s, and when she stops trying to act like she’s a hundred miles left of the far left . . . she’ll go back to being about a foot left of center. . . . And, of course, she’s a politician â€" that’s her job. You also state that Senator Clinton was a big part of her husband's team when he worked so very hard for NAFTA, which she now claims (at least before labor audiences) to oppose and says that she never really supported.
I get your point, but it is a sad one indeed.
Senator Clinton has, with the help of former President Clinton, created a very disturbing sense that she is not trustworthy, and that she will lie (no matter how stupid and easily refuted the lie may be, see, e.g., her Bosnia Moment), and do whatever else seems expedient to get back into the White House, regardless of her actual substantive views. The sense that that's the way she is, in addition to being widely held, is consistent with my personal observations.
The picture which you paint is hardly an appealing one, and it certainly is not one which would encourage me to wish her well. True, all politicians do these things. It is also true that a big dish of ice cream with lots of yummy chocolate sauce tastes good and is fattening. I hope that few would vote for her because of the extreme politics to which she stoops, just as I hope that few would strive to become obese. Modest quantities of politics as usual (or even worse than usual) may be palatable. Too much is too much.
Senators Obama and McCain have their own problems; to me, either would be far preferable to Senator Clinton as the President of our country.
Dan
8 - Al Barger
people who have bumper stickers that say both “U.S. Out of Iraq” and “Free Tibet” (and lack the ability to see the irony therein)
Outstanding and significant observation, Miss Staci - particularly for someone from the left side of the aisle. Thank you.
9 - Staci Schoff
Dee thank you for providing proof that there people other than the intellectually elite who support Obama. If he wins the nomination that will be a stereotype we'll need to quickly overcome.
10 - Baronius
Staci, isn't the election over? Unless Clinton can earn more assigned delegates than Obama, her party would have to overthrow the results of the caususes and primaries. They *can*, because of the superdelegates, but do you think they would or should?
That's a pretty ugly road to go down. Let's face it, there are people who don't think Bush's presidency is legitimate despite the Florida Secretary of State's verification, the Electoral College vote, and the Supreme Court's decisions. A Clinton nomination would reek of back-room cigar smoke. While I don't think Obama's race affects his electability, if he were turned away by the party's officials, it would be seen in racial terms. The damage to the party would be incalculable.
11 - Zedd
intellectually elite = a good thing
Is it me????
12 - Staci Schoff
Dan, I appreciate your comments and I don't disagree with you entirely. I appreciate people like Obama and people who climb trees to prevent them from being cut down and such, but the presidency is going to go to the person who wins over the majority of the people -- that's what democracy is. It's better to have someone in there who is on your side, even if they're limited in terms of the extreme to which they can push your position.
This is a U.S. presidential election -- it's not the Bolshevik revolution. Obama isn't going to be able "change" a whole hell of a lot even if he gets elected (and I don't think he will). We need someone with sense and experience who understands the art of negotiation and compromise.
It IS a little "sad," but that's the best we've got to hope for in a democratic nation.
13 - Staci Schoff
Zedd, it's only sort of a good thing. ;-)
The majority of people are not intellectually elite and they won't vote for someone they can't relate to (in most cases).
Really though, I was just pointing out the intellectually challenged nature of one particular comment on this thread.
14 - Staci Schoff
Baronius, that's a good point. I think the DNC will ultimately play to win -- so we'll see how it goes.
15 - El Bicho
Considering the intellectually challenged nature of your post you really aren't one to cast aspersions at commentors. There are so many problems with this article it's hard to know where to start. We'll skip over the fact that like Clinton all you have is conjecture, such as how he will do in the general election. Would it killed you to have included one poll from anywhere to back you positions?
"You may not like Clinton’s politics, but don’t tell me she isn’t good at her job."
Yes, Clinton is such a great politician that she was a lock to win the nomination the day after Kerry lost, yet she can't beat a one-term Senator. She's losing so don't tell me she is good at her job. btw, how is lying about what happened in Kosovo being good at her job?
"Another advantage she’ll have over Obama in the general election is that she voted to go to war initially."
When have you heard Clinton trumpet that accomplishment in a speech? If you think that's going to be a positive, you might want to talk to more people than two registered Republicans.
The progressives aren't em masse going to vote for McCain, but I wouldn't expect them all to show up at the polls.
16 - Staci Schoff
El Bicho -- Hopefully this won't kill me, but one can never be sure - you can refer both to realclearpolitics.com or gallup.com for information that backs up my assertion both that Clinton will fare better against McCain AND that a significant number of Clinton supporters will take McCain over Obama.
Furthermore, the people who might stay home rather than vote for Clinton are about the same number of people who voted for Ralph Nader -- big deal. And won't it be such a grand statement and good for progressive causes everywhere if they are so so so very good that they stay home and help McCain get elected. Grow up.
17 - Dan Miller
Staci,
I am, obviously, concerned that you may be correct. As things now stand, I am convinced neither that the DNC will have the intestinal fortitude and lack of judgment to give Senator Clinton the nomination, nor that even those members of the electorate who like her now would take kindly to her following the general election campaign.
There is, more than likely, a whole giant manure pile in her her Augean stable which Senator Obama has not tried to muck out and put on public display. Somehow, I doubt that Senator McCain would have comparable reservations. Even if most of the muck is imaginary, which I somehow doubt, there are enough conspiracy theorists around to mold it into horrors sufficiently credible to convince many voters that there must be something there, even if they don't know quite what.
There is just something about her.
I do not like thee, Dr. Fell.
The reasons why I cannot tell.
But this one thing I know
and know full well,
I do not like thee Dr. Fell
I can't off hand remember the name of author the little poem, but it seems to fit Senator Clinton quite well.
There have been many times when I have thought that something unfortunate would happen, and have been very happy to have time prove me wrong. This time, I shall be happy to see a general election campaign between Senators Obama and McCain. Perhaps others are also tired of the constant and predictable spins, and agree that we deserve, and are capable of having, something even just a tiny bit better.
Dan
18 - Dan Miller
Staci,
And now former President Clinton is quoted as having claimed in West Virginia,
I wonder how ironic that statement, particularly the part about "different rules" will be viewed, by voters and super delegates as well.
Dan
19 - Baronius
"Furthermore, the people who might stay home rather than vote for Clinton are about the same number of people who voted for Ralph Nader -- big deal."
Staci, normally I'd agree. But it wouldn't just be ultra-progressives who would stay home if Clinton gets the nomination. At this point, if Clinton finagles the nomination, it would alienate a large chunk of the party, including the black base which votes 90% Democratic.
20 - Zedd
The majority of people are not intellectually elite
That is elitist.
Also, these politicians have not been high brow and super intellectual in making their pleas. I find it regrettable that people overstate their intellect because of their experiences.
What makes Obama smart is not his ability to speak in prose pontificate on the social maladjustments in a manner that sends the mind spinning, it is that he can get to the heart of the matter rather quickly and simply. That is intelligence. The fact that he was caught articulating the strategy by which to reach a population that would under normal circumstances be considered impossible for him to reach and he was able to look BEYOND race and hit the nail on the head, they are frustrated and feel hopeless (bitter if you will) and that madame is the truth. That is intelligent. Talking down to and about people signifies a "missing it".
Hillary basically said, "you are beneath Obama and he is talking over you. It takes me to explain that to you". Now some who may be intellectually deficient missed that and agreed. Many others said "no we get what he is saying and and he is right".
However simply because you have taken time to read up on the issues or you may have gone to college or have had certain experiences, it doesn't give you the right to make such broad sweeping comments about the American populous. Especially after having written this article. However, I will assume that you are young and forgive.
21 - Staci Schoff
Umm, Zedd, by definition the majority of people can't be elite. Sorry -- I didn't write the dictionary, so don't blame me.
I have never suggested that Obama lacks intelligence or character or that his ideas are bad. In fact, I like him. I have only suggested that he doesn't have as good of a chance at being elected president of the United States as Hillary. You don't have to defend Obama to me. He's a good smart dude -- I get it. Thanks.
22 - Al Barger
As a rightwing nutjob, I'm hoping for Hillary to get the nomination, primarily on grounds that I'd much rather actually have her for president if the country turns out bound and determined to elect a damned Democrat. Look - Ann Coulter, Al Barger and Richard Melon Sciafe can't ALL be wrong.
But Machiavellian Republicans at this point are totally rooting for Obama. Just imagine POW McCain vs the friend of the Weather Underground. Oh. My. God. Barack on the top of the ticket might be enough to turn the whole frickin' Congress back over to the Republicans - and NO sensible person wants to see that.
I have to think that Hillary's going to pull out the nomination, cause I find it hard to believe that the Democrat Party is that suicidal. Hear me now, believe me later: If the Democrats nominate Obama, by fall they'll be wishing they'd nominated George McGovern again.
23 - Staci Schoff
Baronius, I can't really argue that point based on anything factual, but I'm not convinced that black people would stay home and let McCain win in protest. I suppose there's a chance you could be right, but I wouldn't bet my last dollar on it.
24 - Staci Schoff
Thanks Al, I suppose if I can't get anyone else to agree with me a rightwing nutjob will do. ;-)
Sadly, the Democrats have not historically been averse to election year suicide...
What good are principles if you can't gain the power to implement them?
25 - Clavos
The majority of people are not intellectually elite
That is elitist.
Yes, it is, but it's also true.
There's nothing inherently wrong in being elitist.
Also, these politicians have not been high brow and super intellectual in making their pleas
They can't be. They'll turn off (and bore) most of the voters.
In the words of one of our great philosophers, H. L. Mencken:
"No one in this world, so far as I know... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
Notes on journalism, Chicago Tribune
[September 19, 1926]