Today on Blogcritics
Home » While Dems Talk of Party Unity, Some Clinton Supporters Plan to Undermine Obama

While Dems Talk of Party Unity, Some Clinton Supporters Plan to Undermine Obama

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Reality seems to be finally dawning, however slowly, on Hillary Clinton. Even as most Americans were recognizing Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee for president, Hillary refused to concede and start unifying her party. Instead, she gave a startling non-concession speech Tuesday night and dragged her candidacy out for at least one more day. Many of her supporters are having an equally difficult time accepting Obama’s victory.

Cristi Adkins, a prominent Hillary Clinton supporter and frequent Neal Cavuto guest, appeared on Cavuto’s Fox News show today to promote “Clintons for McCain”. This newly launched organization is a group of diehard Clinton supporters who are so incensed over the loss of the nomination that they are pledging that come November, they will abandon their party and cast their votes for Republican nominee John McCain.

Sexism seems to be the perceived reason for Clinton’s loss, at least among her supporters. Adkins actually used the phrase “Bullied out of the White House” to describe Clinton’s current predicament, and railed against Obama’s army of paid bloggers for their apparent role in Clinton’s downfall. She also brought up the popular vote vs. number of delegates issue. She is a decidedly unhappy voter who feels the candidate of her choice was unjustly denied, and apparently there are a lot of others who feel the same way. They feel cheated and simply refuse to accept Not-Hillary as their candidate.

Cavuto didn’t take the opportunity to point out to Adkins that it is delegates, not the popular vote, that wins these elections. It might seem unfair, but that’s how it works. Clinton, however entitled to the highest office of the land she may have felt, is subject to this system, just like every other candidate. The rules do not change for her. Cavuto did point out to Adkins that she was, however unintentionally, coming across as a sore loser. He was right. When presented with a “Hillary as VP” scenario, Adkins still refuses to vote for Obama, even if it would put her candidate a step closer to the presidency.

In a way, it might make sense, if sense were involved in making this decision. As Adkins stated, Clinton and McCain are more similar on the issues than Clinton and Obama. And Clinton’s supporters are probably correct that she would have had a better chance to beat McCain in November. She’s certainly a more experienced candidate than Obama.

But the Democratic Party’s desire and need to unify after a bruising battle for the nomination could be seriously undermined if a sizable portion of their membership refuses to support the party because they feel cheated out of the nominee of their choice, or even just out of spite. Taking back the White House has been a huge goal of the Democratic Party since 2000, and this can’t help; in fact, it could really hurt. McCain’s camp has indicated they will be going after Clinton supporters. “Clintons for McCain” could give them a huge jump start. Adkins never said that she and others like her will vote for McCain because he’s the candidate they believe in. They’re voting for him because they’re angry and this is their way of hitting back.

As their appearance last weekend at the DNC Florida/Michigan delegates meetings showed, Clinton has some extremely vocal and emotional supporters, and like their candidate, they don’t seem to be able to accept that their dream has come to an end, at least for now. Most of the voters who fall into this category are women, and you know what they say about women scorned, or who even think they’ve been scorned. “Clintons for McCain” are not supporting McCain, they’re voting for him. There’s a difference.

If McCain wins in November, he may have Clinton supporters to thank for helping him defeat Obama.  Good luck with that party unity thing, Democrats.

Powered by

About Melinda Loomis

  • Watchdog

    Cavuto DID point out to Adkins that the delegate count counts, and the popular vote doesn’t. Were you paying attention?

  • jamminsue

    I am a lifelong Democrat my first Presidential vote was for McGovern against Nixon. I am a Clinton supporter. Once it became clear she could not get the delegates, I considered voting for McCain, but that was predicated on ability in the field of foreign policy and experience, and hoping for an enlightened energy and social policy, not a feeling that she has been scorned.

    That idea has been dashed since McCain has been talking like a neocon. So, now all I can hope for is that Obama is smart about his VP spot and picks someone with long foreign policy ability.

  • Becky

    I was voting agianst Obama and for Hillary.Obama would lie and then change his lie and then change it again till people would except it.He is a bonehead (his phrase not mine)that kept pushing the wrong button.The people in his life are filled with hate for this country.Even his own mother did not like America.I read her theises no wonder Michelle liked her mother in law.So maybe I am an informed voter and not just not a sore loser.I will vote Country before party From ohio

  • Ruvy

    It’s worth noting that Clinton vouched for Obama at her AIPAC speech a day ago. So, we should bear in mind what is really going on – and it looks like an attempt to get the VP spot on the ticket.

    If LBJ could arrange the murder of Kennedy….

  • Arch Conservative

    When it comes to the Clintons and their supporters the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Her supporters, like her don’t give a damn about anything but themselves. Never have, never will.

    “If Hillary can’t be president then hell……..we might as well just turn all those nukes so that they are pointing at us and press the red button.”

    It nothing short of sickening watching even one American citizen defend the Clintons still to this day. The most comical part about it is that if Bill and Hillary could once again regain the White House by offing those who stand up for them no matter what, they would do it in a heartbeat.

    Germany had Hitler, Russia had Stalin, Cambodia had Pol Pot and we have the Clintons. For those of you who think I might be bring overly dramatic I’d say that the only reason the Clintons haven’t murdered millions to obtain absolute power (they’ve actually had killed quite a few less…more like in the hundreds) is that it’s not practically feasible.

    As much as I can’t stand Obama I’d like to give him some free advice that I’m sure he’s already gotten at least a thousand and one times. Don’t pick Hillary as your VP or you may find yourself flying over the Atlantic to visit some European nation one day on air force one when suddenly the planes engines lose power…then you hear a noise….then…….

    Thy name is Clinton….

    A sociopath by any other name would be as scary.

  • Arch Conservative

    wouldn’t be

  • pleasexcuetheinterruption

    In a way, it might make sense, if sense were involved in making this decision. As Adkins stated, Clinton and McCain are more similar on the issues than Clinton and Obama.

    Bullshit. The Clinton and Obama platforms are nearly identical word for word. Go to their websites, it’s like they cut and pasted from each other. That’s what’s made this whole thing stupid from the very beginning. Two candidates one ideology.

    As far as I am concerned, any Clinton supporter that votes for McCain ought to be shot for excessive ignorance.

  • Clavos

    Just in case, the Republicans should have teams of EMTs on full alert…

  • bliffle

    The Clintons are risking losing their standing in the dems. The net result may be that they have no party to run from for future office. Maybe they’ll try a third party, but that has poor prospects.

  • http://roseparade.typepad.com/ Melinda Loomis

    Last night was the big meeting between Clinton and Obama, and word is that she’ll endorse him on Saturday (we’ll see). If that happens, I wonder if it will sway most of her supporters who were threatening to give their support to McCain.

    Watchdog (well-named): I didn’t actually catch that comment. The Clinton supporters don’t seem as concerned about the delegates at this point, a big part of their argument is that more votes have been cast for her than Obama or anyone else for that matter and that makes her the most viable Democratic and Presidential candidate.

  • Arch Conservative

    “I wonder if it will sway most of her supporters who were threatening to give their support to McCain.”

    Of course not Melinda. The gameplan is still to sabotage Obama’s chances so that Hillary can run again in 2012. Watch for Clinton to make some suspicious looking gesture with her hands as she’s giving the speech endorsing Obama. Sort of like throwing a gang sign. This is code to all the Clintonistas to say…”don’t believe a word of this, you know what tod o.”

  • blatham

    Melinda
    You missed the real story here. Perhaps one of those desired paychecks might come as a consequence of a new and better story?

    Cristi Adkins is working with or for the RNC.

    On May 15, the domain name “clintonsformccain.com” was registered to The Republican National Committee (verify at register.com, whois lookup).

    A writer at Wired (Sarah Stirland) somehow got wind of this and sent two inquiries to the RNC. They went ananswered. She wrote up the story and it went online June 5

    On June 4 there was a new registration made but this time with the “for” replaced by “4” and now with the registrant’s identity hidden.

    If you attend with some care to Cristi’s interviews on Fox (and of course it would be on Fox, wouldn’t it?) and likewise if you attend to the content of her two sites (and the many related/linked sites) you’ll note several oddities:
    1) Obama smears proliferate. Some, as on Cristi’s ‘clintons4mccain’ myspace page, are deeply racist. That he’s a Muslim seems to be taken for granted.
    2) McCain is ceaselessly lauded.
    3) All of the above, in style and in content, comprise an absolutely predictable compendium of RNC/conservative talking points.
    4) There is NOTHING in Cristi’s interviews or on these sites which speaks to Hillary’s platform proposals or to her Democratic/liberal/progressive political philosophy. All you’ll hear or read is “DNC betrayed Democrats”, “Democratic party is now socialist, radical left, Hollywood etc”. And in contrast, there’s precious little denouncing Republican/conservative ideas and NOTHING critical about McCain. Rather odd for a group of lifelong Hillary supporters or even for independents, wouldn’t you say?

    5) Further validation of the thesis here is found in the comparable (and likely related) Limbaugh “operation chaos” project.

    So go back and take another careful look, Melinda. The real story is better than the narrative they’ve sold you (and pretty much everyone else too). Heck, might be a check in here for ya.

    love and best wishes
    blatham