Thursday, June 19, 2008

Cutting Off Your Nose to Spite Your Face...

Barack Obama won. Hillary Clinton lost. So it goes in primaries. And this primary will probably go down as the most famous of them all because no matter who won, an African-American or a woman, it would have been, and was, quite earth-shattering. But in the end, there was a winner, even if nearly half the voters didn't want that person to win. Personally, had Hillary won, I'd have been very disappointed. But come November, I'd have voted for her because the alternative is COMPLETELY unacceptable to me.

And this is the nature of a primary season. The voters speak, a candidate emerges who then goes on to the general elections. And in most cases, if not all cases, the party and voters line up behind the party's candidate and do their best to get him elected because, again, the alternative is simply unacceptable.

So why is it, as stated in this article, there are so many Hillary supporters who refuse to back their party's candidate simply because that candidate is not the candidate they wanted? Is the alternative, having yet another minimum of four years of Republican rule under a candidate who intends to keep the status quo and allow, even cause this country to sink even lower than it already has both in the international community and economically, better than backing and voting for the candidate who had mostly the same solutions to many issues as Hillary did? Is the candidate of ones choice not winning a primary enough of a reason to go and vote for everything against which a person stands, just to spite the party that didn't deliver ones candidate of choice?

I just don't get it.

Furious loyalists of the former first lady protested at a Democratic Party meeting in Washington, vowing to bolt from the party if Clinton did not win the nomination.

Last week, the co-chairs of the University of Iowa Students for Hillary told followers they should vote for McCain, or, if they could not "stomach" that, consider Cynthia McKinney, the presumptive Green Party candidate.
Bolt from the party?! What are they? Three-year-olds? Vote for another candidate, one who has NO chance of winning, just to take away votes from the Democratic candidate?! How incredibly selfish and stupid IS that? It's insane!

Hopefully, as the article stated, tempers will indeed cool and all those ardent Hillary supporters will actually LISTEN to their candidate, or ex-candidate in this case, and vote for Obama, as Hillary has stated several times they should. Hopefully.


Kylopod said...

Relax. In 2000, shortly after Bush seized the nomination, close to half of McCain supporters said they wouldn't vote for Bush in the general election. Most of them came around eventually. Obama has far less to worry about, not just because the number of disgruntled Hillary supporters is much smaller, but because at the moment he has the advantage in the polls, in spite of the Hillary people. A lot can change between now and Election Day, and probably will, but the problem of embittered Hillary fans isn't likely to get worse.

Am Kshe Oref - A Stiff-Necked People said...

Oh, I'm sure it won't. The attitude just kind of irks me. Sure, had Hillary won, I'd have been upset. I don't think she's presidential material. But I think McCain is even LESS so, so it would have been a case of voting for the lesser of the two evils, as it was in 2004 for me. But I wouldn't have voted for McCain, or even really considered it, just because I was pissed Hillary got the nomination and not Barack Obama.

anonymous said...

I don't think many democrats who believe in democratic principles (church/state separation, reproductive autonomy, legal aid, an end to the war in Iraq, equal rights and civil liberties, etc.) will actually vote for McCain. Although the past two elections and '92 have shown us how much damage third party candidates can cause!

Am Kshe Oref - A Stiff-Necked People said...

No kidding! Especially in 2000. That was just WRONG!!

Kylopod said...

The thing is, I do think McCain is presidential material. I think his pandering to the right wing is just that, and doesn't indicate how he will govern. Thus, if Hillary had gotten the nomination, I would have been in a quandary, caught between my strong policy disagreements with McCain and my feeling that he has much better character than she has. (I am not using the term "character" the way the right uses it, to encompass things like patriotism and marital fidelity. I mean simply the personal qualities needed to make an effective president. McCain has definite flaws in this arena, but they pale next to Hillary's.)

Am Kshe Oref - A Stiff-Necked People said...

I don't know. I think his hands would have been tied. No matter what, I think Hillary would have been a better choice than McCain.

But it is moot. As it stands, we have a FANTASTIC candidate! :)