Not Yet
The Hotline's Chris Bodenner talked with several HRC die-hards at the Nat'l Building Museum yesterday. Here are some of their thoughts:
In her classy concession speech, Hillary Clinton spoke of reconciliation and regrouping against GOPers. But beneath the calls for Dem unity lingered a roiling resentment among Clinton's die-hard supporters, many of whom felt she had been cheated out of the WH nom by a sexist media, a conspiratorial Dem leadership, and a complicit Barack Obama.
One didn't have to approach Clinton supporters to get their opinions; many of them openly, and sometimes loudly, vented their frustrations to one another. "They took delegates away from her, what's up with that?! ... It makes me so mad." "[Obama] doesn't deserve a single delegate [from MI]. ... He ran away from the voters, ran away from a re-vote" "The vicious sexism revealed in this campaign has been sickening."
Many supporters were eager to get their opinions on the record.
Judith Fogel, a writer and ex-reporter from Annendale, VA, said the media was "humiliating" Clinton as she hung on past 6/3 p.m. Clinton was "genuine" and "ethical" to the very end, and "self-sacrificial" in the face of such scrutiny. Fogel didn't fault Obama for trying to push Clinton out, saying he was "forced into a corner." But she still might vote for John McCain, even though she's never voted for a GOP WH candidate.
Sara Brown, a retired biologist from the Shenandoah Valley and Clinton volunteer, thought the speech was "gracious ... vintage Hillary." Like Fogel, Brown was upset over the criticism Clinton received for refusing to bow out 6/3 p.m.
"She needed to leave the race on her own terms." Asked if her fellow Clinton supporters would now rally around Obama, she replied, "Give them a little time, don't try and force it." But speaking for herself, Brown -- who's never voted GOP and cites SCOTUS appointments and global warming as her top issues -- says she's considering voting for McCain.
"Obama has a showy resume ... he would need training wheels in office," she said. Should Clinton be his VP? "I'm not sure, whatever is best for her," she emphasized.
Two middle-aged Clinton volunteers, who asked to remain anonymous because they feared harassment by Obama supporters, said the Dem leadership had actively conspired to take the nod away from Clinton. DNC Chair Howard Dean demonstrated "a total lack of leadership" in the MI and FL crisis because he didn't want Clinton to get any of those states' delegates. And Speaker Nancy Pelosi "should be ashamed" for her secret support for Obama. (One of the women said she had volunteered for every Dem campaign since McGovern '72, so the animus she displayed towards her party was particularly striking.)
But most of the womens' ire was directed at the media, particularly "the men on MSNBC." By "doing the GOP's dirty work" against Clinton, pundits such as Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann are "secretly for the Republicans" and "want the weaker candidate" to go up against McCain. Both women said they would refuse to vote for Obama "unless she's on the ticket." But they are "still holding out" for Clinton at the top of that ticket, insisting that she should "take the fight" to the convention floor [Chris Bodenner].
MSNBC the caveman network.
To all those HRC supporters who blame the media:
The media is a platform for your candidate. ALL candidates use the media: appearances on the shows, commercials, and PR/talking points. Only when you screw up does the media jump all over you. So imho, if you want to blame the media for HRC's loss, you have nowhere to look but Ms. HRC and her campaign's at-times inept handling of the press.
She and her surrogates could have (SHOULD have) used the media FAR more effectively. And, in fact, if it wasn't for what I thought was her campaign's mishandling of the press, I would have been with her to the end as well... but she didn't. It is her fault and hers alone.
IMHO the only truly uncalled-for attack on Hillary was by Chris Matthews. And she addressed it early and emphatically. Very well done on her part, and the result was a public apology by CM. In the overall scheme of things it was just a blip on the radar simply BECAUSE she handled it so well.
Pretty much the REST of the media critique of her campaign was her or her surrogates' own doing or involved issues that her campaign did not adequately address. And again, that is on HER. We all know the media is unfair. But you still need to use it to your advantage as best as you can, and she failed at that.
So, honestly. I give her all the props in the world as a person, as a Woman, as a Senator, and a Democrat... I have supported her for years and still support her even though I switched to supporting Obama mid-campaign... But I simply do not want to hear any more excuses about the media.
The sooner Hillary's die-hards can get beyond that, the better off we ALL will be in November. IMHO, her speech yesterday was excellent and clearly historic. She deserves a whole lot of credit and I've always thought that she would be an amazing President and she deserves to be President. But in this case and in this moment I feel that Obama deserves it more (and race and gender have nothing to do with that).
Point being, I thought that yesterday she made the absolutely critical point to make, and that was that to look backward is NOT to move forward. And we all need to move forward.
That's my $.02 on HRC, the media, and her concession/endorsement. Thanks for reading... Now let's get together and stick it to John McCain and the GOP in November.
Hillary lost because Americans aren't really quite as dumb as she and Bill cynically believe them to be. All those years of experience ... that blatant lie ... a lot of Americans really can count on their fingers and toes high enough to figure out that the only real government experience she's had other than running for President while neglecting real senatorial duties was helping, very resourcefully and energetically, to build a case for impeachment against Richard Nixon, and that is more than counterbalanced by her trying to get an impeached President back into the White Hosue this year. A lot of Americans started listening to her a bit more carefully after the "sniper fire" "mis-speak," and they wondered how anyone who really cared about subsidized healthcare as opposed to subsidized votes could have "mis-spoken" again about the woman who was allegedly denied medical care in contravention of EMTALA regulations.
Actually, the media was and is accidentally kinder to Hillary than it could have been, ironically because Americans, including American journalists, are almost as dumb as the Clintons cynically believe them to be. Hillary's "mis-speaks" were too complicated for dumb journalists to explain to dumb readers and viewers, so the fact that she was actually telling melodramatic lies to hoodwink dumb Americans into supporting her slipped right by a lot of people. Today, largely praising her for her concesion speech, dub American journalists are demonstrating short term memory and reason deficits that don't allow them to put it together that the woman's an unrealistic sore loser who cost the Democratic Party millions of dollars in monies spent to convince her she'd lost that could have been better spent coping with John McCain.
Her attacks on Obama over the church / racism issue (and religious people are inherently racist -- the recipe for racism is believing some sentient beings are superior to others and, oh, by the way, what color is God?) and other issues are now firmly planted in American minds and can be very effectively used by McCain.
She has damaged her Party tremendously, more even than her husband's impeachment did. It's what the power-mad Clintons do. Thank goodness Americans aren't quite as dumb as these awful people think they are.
Oh nevermind.. I'm an idiot. And full of hate and jealousy over the Clintons.
You men don't know what you are talking about. I am sick of all of you.
People fail to understand if the DNC seated all the delegates of MI and FL, Hillary still would lose
Ethan, your 2 cents wasn't even worth that. Arthur, you got it right with your second post. The examples of media bias and sexism are glaring but hopefully Hillary's campaign will have drawn attention to the problem if nothing else and women will unite to make sure this never, never happens to another woman candidate.
HRC lost because she has no resume except as Bill's wife.
She agreed to rules that favored her candidacy. Then when the people of Iowa got to know her & rejected her she decided to change them.
As to sexism wasn't it sexist to characterize Paula Jones a low level state employee sexually harassed by a governor as a nut. Wasn't it sexist to characterize a 20 Y old girl sexually used by a 50ish man as a lying stalker.
Clinton got a free ride on her tax returns, her husband's ties to Arab dictators & her lies. She lost because you can't fool all the people all the time.
I would have voted for Hillary. Now my vote is going to McCain. Obama is so far left, he will make Carter look conservative and destroy the economy. Look at the way wall-street is reacting to McCain and Obama being our two choices. Hillary at least had some money smarts.
I just want to reply to TINA'S comment "You men don't know what you are talking about. I am sick of all of you."
As a MALE supporter of Hilary Clinton it angers me that her losing the democratic nomination is being deemed as "sexist". Correct me if I am wrong, but the comment you just made is just as sexist. In all honesty I strongly believe that the equality of men and women has vastly improved. I work under a woman. There is no denying that women have had to work harder to get where they are today but so have the African Americans and many other 'groups' in society. It is ridiculous to suggest voting for McCain simply because Hilary lost the nomination. An educated, rash adult would vote based on policy and which candidate would bring change to our country. McCain policies are those of Bush's, we have a chance to restore our country. This sexist thing is getting very old.
As a Clinton supporter, I will not be supporting Barack Obama or the DNC in November. They hand-picked a candidate who actually got fewer votes. How did they think that would work out?
Did they think we would just fall into line because they told us to? 18 MILLION voters! The DNC will wonder what happened in November. Too late then.
Sorry, I actually really like divided, or what some of us call balanced government. I can't wait for November, for the chance to let the DNC know how glad I am to be an Independent again.
I am not a liberal. The first Democrat I voted for is Al Gore and I'm now a witness to it:
Democrats eat their own.
I'd bet money that a lot of these "Clinton supporters" posting here are just Republicans playing make-believe. On the remote chance this isn't true, here is a news flash: many of us have supported a candidate who didn't win the party nomination. We know that all of the Democrats are closer to each other, and us, in policies and preferences than any of the Republicans.
We have a Democratic congress and a lawless GOP president at the moment. If you like how that is working out, vote for Bush's third term - because that is what McCain will be. If you're like the 80% of the public that doesn't like how that is working out, vote for Obama. It's really that simple.
Does it strike anyone else what a tremendous disservice some of Senator Clinton's so-called supporters are doing to her future prospects in the party and in government? I'm reaching the point with all the whining and excuse-making that I don't much give a damn what they do. Let them vote for McCain. Let him replace Ginsburg on the Court. Let a woman's right to chose be taken away. Deal with this: Clinton lose. She lost because she ran a poor campaign. She did not lose because of sexism or a hostile press or some great Obama conspiracy. She lost because she had too strong a sense of entitlement and too large an ego. She could not admit she made a mistake, so she could not correct a mistake. Geez, sounds Bushian, doesn't it. Fact is, the Democratic process includes the caucauses. She knew this. I imagine she helped draft the rules. How do you ignore this simple fact and then claim you were cheated. I like Senator Clinton. I liked her well enough that right up to the plaigiarism charges she leveled and the Cincinnati State speech, I was going to vote for. The day after that speech, the bumper sticker came off my car. A month later, an Obama sticker when on it. Obama won my vote, but Hillary also lost it. No one's fault but her own.
No real Clinton supporter would vote for John "100 years of War" McCain and his beer magnate trust-fund Stepford wife. Please. I know a LOT of feminists and they are all smart people. None of them would consider voting for a Republican because of supposed "sexism" in the media.
Tina was a neocon spammer at other blogs. The person who responded to my thoughtful post talked about "glaring examples" of sexism without listing a single one. Hmm.
HERE is the REAL story that these spammers are trying to distract us from:
GOP Insiders Worry About McCain's Chances
"I think we've got a world of problems," said one Republican strategist with extensive experience in presidential campaigns. He said this came home to him with a thud when he watched Obama and McCain give speeches last Tuesday, with the Democrat speaking before "20,000 screaming fans, while John McCain looked every bit of his 72 years" in a speech televised from New Orleans. This Republican cited the liberal blogger Atrios' description of McCain's speech with a green backdrop that made McCain "look like the cottage cheese in a lime Jell-O salad."
For McCain to stand a chance of winning, the operative contended, the campaign, the Republican National Committee, or an independent group will have to finance sustained negative ads developing a broad assault on Obama's credibility as a national leader at a time of terrorist threat. McCain, however, has gone out of his way to aggressively discourage such activity, the operative pointed out, which, he argued, may kill McCain's chances.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/08/gop-insiders-worry-about_n_105946.html
your "right to choose" will disappear with Barak F. Obama along with everyone's right to choose as all choice will be centralized with the "community chooser" who knows what is best for you. The problem with the Dems is they are run by elite groups who don't know anyone out here in flyoverland. We don't vote for liberals. We think a community organizer is someone who plans the fourth of July picnic. While she was probably gritting her teeth the entire time, at least Hilary lived in the real world while Billy was Gov.
>>>your "right to choose" will disappear with Barak F. Obama along with everyone's right to choose as all choice will be centralized with the "community chooser" who knows what is best for you
Haha. This coming from a partisan hack who supports The DECIDER.
Nice one. You are a constant source of comedy, my friend.
Who says I support that liberal? Come and visit us in the real world this summer.
>>>Who says I support that liberal?
Haha. I love neocon humor.
>>>Come and visit us in the real world this summer.
Gladly! Where do you live?
Chances are I've already been there. I've been to over 40 states. I love the real world.
I despise those vile, little men at MSNBC. Matthews, Russert and Olberman sicken me. I hope they get what they have put out towards Senator Clinton. Thank goodness she never granted access to that bastard Matthews or Olberman. Russert should simply be fired. They could barely contain their glee when Senator Clinton gracefully conceded. You three are simply awful and sexist.
To the "I'm an idiot" trickster who followed up my earlier comment using my own name: How very shadily, sordidly, sleazily, thoroughly Clintonesque of you. What a shining example of responsible, reasonable, "Gee, I want to grow up to be just like you" decorum.