Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Obama brings out the best in Hillary

vastleft's picture

If there's anything that's sorely lacking in the Beltway (and there is), it's blatant disrespect for hogwash.

If she can somehow pull this campaign out, I hope she'll keep channeling her inner Beale.

Go, watch!

0
No votes yet

Comments

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

One of the reasons it is possible for Obama____s to chew over Hillary's record is that she has one. Others are not similarly burdened:

keefe

Pleased to see that she's, ah, calling a shovel a shovel.

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

I think this was funny. Not terribly important (like taking on obama's mailers) but a mild tweaking of Obama.

But, of course, I'm not a media gasbag, or an obot, so what do I know.

Voodoo Chile's picture
Submitted by Voodoo Chile on

Vastleft, why did you have to link to HuffingtonPost? I couldn't help myself and started reading some of the comments and my faith in humanity is now that much lower.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Seriously, the bigots have come out hard across the blog spectrum after her funny take on Obama's "hope" campaign.* How rare it is to read a comment without a bigoted slur, usually combined with a call for "revenge." The glee over an Obama win will now be even more unhinged than ever.

That's what I hate most about his campaign: a win will completely legitimize the wild misogynistic bigotry that has been crucial to his success (Seriously, why the hell would he be "winning" men by 20 points or more, especially white men with an Oprah-type campaign? Imagine the insane scorn that would've been heaped on Obama if he was a woman running such a campaign).

I can't stomach voting for him in the GE, I honestly can't: A Trojan horse politician who divides the left, appeases the right ensures we win the battle, lose the war + legitimization of open anti-female hate, from Democrats no less, cripples the fight against bigotry, both socially and politically = Me sitting this one out.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Honestly, is he even qualified to be president at all, let alone right now in the midst of a political and economic clusterfuck? bringiton's editorial cartoon is depressing but true.

foxx's picture
Submitted by foxx on

write in Hillary, that is what I am going to do.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

I will write in Edwards, my first choice, if Obama "wins" the nomination.

horseloverfat's picture
Submitted by horseloverfat on

Write in votes are not counted unless the candidate is an "authorized" write-in candidate, which I doubt HRC or JE would be.

I will vote for some one who is on the ballot but not named McCain or Obama or Nader.

Horselover Fat

Stellaaa's picture
Submitted by Stellaaa on

For some of us who refuse to go to Huff Po, TPM etc, please warn us. Cause now when I find myself there through a link it has the rather icky feeling.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Why would anyone write-in a presidential vote?

Electing ANY Democrat is critical this time for the judicial appointments, hundreds of District and Appeals positions but most importantly the Supreme Court. A Republican will have the opportunity to overturn Roe, changing a 5-4 protective court into a 6-3 or even a 7-2 plutocratic court that will not only overturn Roe but provide legal cover for every possible authoritarian grasp you can think of.

Those of you who say you will not vote for one Democrat or another, let me plainly say that you are being irresponsible. There are more important issues at stake than your personal hurt feelings or anger about not getting your preferred choice for the Democratic nomination.

Grow up. Act like an adult. Do what needs doing. Vote for any Dem, regardless. Anything less than full support of and voting for a Democrat for president in November is a betrayal of progressive values and, frankly speaking, traitorous to the Constitution.

Either you are part of the solution – or you are the problem.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

I know they're not counted, but the hell I'll vote for McCain no matter how much I've come to despise Obama. It's a protest vote, at best, assuming there will be enough write-ins that the media or blogs will be unable to ignore them. If people write in HRC and Obama loses, his fans will blame Hillary herself for a McCain presidency.

Until then, I'll be praying HRC can pull off some wins in OH and TX. Please.

Lost in Space's picture
Submitted by Lost in Space on

If people write in HRC and Obama loses, his fans will blame Hillary herself for a McCain presidency.

Obama's core would still blame Hillary if he wins the Primary and loses the GE even without the write-in possibility. That is how deep the poison is now.

- - - - - -

The enemy of my enemy is STILL my enemy. Those who forget this end up being Vulture scraps.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Tell me again, how legitimizing overt misogyny--the justification for reversing Roe--from the left will help us fight for the rights of women and girls against the constant, formidable attack from the right? Emboldening anti-female dehumanization and demonization, from the left mind you, endangers the fight for those rights. Using Roe as extortion doesn't work either.

Besides, when has Obama ever fought for the left against the right? When? You assume he'll actually fight when every time push has come to shove, he cowered to the political establishment; worse, he has an absolutely clear pattern of appeasing the right and dividing the left. This is the man that refers to the past years of fighting the extremist Bush administration as nothing more than a petty "food fight" so it's bullshit to believe he'll be there fighting for us. He'd consider it too "divisive."

There are more important issues at stake than your personal hurt feelings or anger about not getting your preferred choice for the Democratic nomination.

What? Where in my previous comments did I imply "hurt feelings"--at all? I stated 3 valid reasons for refusing to vote for Obama. What issues did I mention that are trivial? Is there any limit to what Democrats can do that would qualify as a legitimate reason not to vote for them? What's the point in believing in principles if you don't take a stand?

Jesus. I'm out of here. The hell I'm going to stand by while some fool calls me a fucking traitor to the Constitution. Unbelievable.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Either you are part of the solution or you are the problem. Either you will join to defeat through the ballot the forces that are destroying this nation or you will not. By passivity you will enable their destructiveness. Hide as you may try to behind an enmity for other people, you are responsible for your own actions; not Barak Obama or me or anyone else. The choice is yours; you define your own character.

We are at a crossroads like no other in our lifetime. Another Republican administration will cost us the judiciary, providing a legal cloak for the steady disassembling of the Constitution and our freedom. Anything less than giving full support to and voting for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be, is a failure to do the minimum patriotic civic duty of a responsible citizen to preserve the Constitution and the nation.

Time to stand up and be counted a patriot or slither into the darkness, into everlasting shame. Your choice, your decision. But don't expect decent people to stand idly and silently by while you preach defeatism and failure. Put yourself out as an enabler of those who would destroy the nation and you will be called out for your perfidy, this time and every time.

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

... that it's imperative to have solidarity in November against the GOP, which means putting an X next to the D.

Now, I could be wrong, but if you are seeking to sway those who are considering not voting or "alternative" voting, calling them perfidious traitors may not prove to be effective.

Lost in Space's picture
Submitted by Lost in Space on

What’s the point in believing in principles if you don’t take a stand?

But as Vastleft and others have said over and over and over again - We have two choices:

The first, voting for the Democrat who could be considered the "lesser" of two evils. I have zero love for Obama's vocal internet core posters. However, the nomination is still very much up in the air, despite SCLM's attempts otherwise. To say Obama wins is presumptuous at this time.

But on the off chance Obama does win the nomination, I will vote for him. And, why? Because alternative number two is even worse:

Protest via voting: Not voting, writing in a another candidate, or voting for a third party candidate. No matter how principled an argument you make, any one of these options equals a vote for John McCain. And Mr. McCain has already made it clear that he WILL do the following:

- Continue the bloodletting in Iraq;
- Appoint Supreme Court Justices like Sam Alito (and by extension Antonin Scalia);

And these two items alone, just based on the recent decisions of the SCOTUS is enough to make me cringe. I will deal with an unknown quantity who may send us a little further down the river than have someone who'll send us flying off the waterfall with a rocket-powered motor.

- - - - - -

The enemy of my enemy is STILL my enemy. Those who forget this end up being Vulture scraps.

horseloverfat's picture
Submitted by horseloverfat on

My red state is not going to be "in play." No reason, therefore, not to make a point by casting a vote that will reduce the percentage of total cast which the winner wins.

Also, hopefully, drawing attention to how PO'ed I am over the undemocratic illegitimate nature of the 2008 nominating process. What will it take to change that?

Horselover Fat

Sima's picture
Submitted by Sima on

And I too will vote a protest vote if Obama takes the nomination.

I'm currently a delegate for Clinton to the county convention, and maybe beyond?. It's held in early April. I'm interested to see what happens there. If she or he haven't conceded it's going to be a knock down drag out fight, I bet, at the convention. Because I live in WA state, where the caucus went 2 to 1 for Obama, but the primary vote was just about evenly split...

Anyway I'm hoping participating further will help with getting the Demo party to switch from caucuses and hold closed primaries. I'll do what I can, and continue to be active, but that doesn't mean I'm going to vote for just anyone. It's my ONLY way of protest, really, I'm hoarding it.

kelley b's picture
Submitted by kelley b on

Now, I could be wrong, but if you are seeking to sway those who are considering not voting or “alternative” voting, calling them perfidious traitors may not prove to be effective.

What if many of the people who say they'd do this never intended to vote for a Democrat in the first place?

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

I think that rather than insist that every vote for Obama or Hillary regardless of the circumstances, I thing we should encourage people to cast symbolic votes in "safe" states (regardless of whether they are Red or Blue safe state), and emphasize the importance of a Democratic vote in swing/battleground states.

I think it would provide some comfort to those who live in battleground states to know that people are making the statement that they want to make in "safe" states - and make it easier for them to vote democratic regardless of who the candidate is.

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

it states like NY, MA, RI and VT are not reliably democratic come november, then its GOP landslide nationwide, in which everyone should feel free to cast a symbolic vote.

janittdott's picture
Submitted by janittdott on

I just rode in to Corrente on a tired horse,
HANDS DOWN the smartest most articulate blogsite I've found so far
(and some of the others are damned smart too!)
So I live in the blissful ignorance one so briefly has
when you don't know the powerstructure...yet.

(like the obamacrats are in...blissful ignorance of american politics)
hence I don't know WHO I may be siding with or insulting.

So I'm just going to speak my mind here and hope no one kills me.
(i'm only partly kidding...)

I got here this morning and Chicagodyke is pulling back
because, as I read her,
she's rightfully sick of the lurid obamaemail onslaught in her inbox
and wants to talk about SOMETHING/ANYTHING else!

(don't we all but I just don't think we...can...for now)

Davidson who has made really EXCELLENT points in this thread
feels driven off from here, one of the LAST Clinton sanctuaries

by bringiton, a pragmatist (as am I) of the better dead than red school.

Okay...time out...in hillaryville.
Amidst friendly fire it gets hard to remember that
WE are not the enemy.

I'm a bloodied old boomer and I coulda told you this will happen.
It's just shot nerves...battle fatigue...pre traumatic stress syndrome
But get over it guys & gurls, cause we CAN'T rest...not yet.

Davidson, you must NOT leave, your voice is clarion and you're right.
Absolutely and totally...right.

And bringiton, having voted a straight democrat ticket WITHOUT FAIL
since I placed my first presidential vote AGAINST Richard Nixon in 68
(in a non binding highschool civics class--back when kids HAD civics)
it is practically impossible for me to say that I actually disagree with
your pertinent and practical points.

But with an...aching heart...this time I do.

For, unlike ANY election I've EVER been faced with in ALL my years,
you're making what may prove a fatal assumption of...appearances,

You are assuming Barack Obama IS a democrat.

My first impression, and mine are practically always dead on
(then I TRY to change them to see I was right to start with)
the FIRST thing I said the FIRST time I ever saw Barack Obama is
THAT, my friends, is a closet...Republican.

And we also just...assume...the one who unleashed Obama on us...
Oprah Winfrey
well, our daily friend all these years, MUST be a liberal democrat
fighting the Good Fight for a united Oprahland, right?
(hmmm...who told us...that?)
because my information, and please correct me if I am mistaken,
is that she calls herself an "Independent" whose been known to vote
Republican.

Isn't the TORMENT of this thread that NO sincere Democrat can EVER
vote Republican and live with themselves?
Without judging either party (and that takes some...effort...for me)
the ESSENTIAL differences between our contrasting world views
are simply TOO systemic to "cross over" even occasionally

And I never trust anyone who...does.

EThe Clinton's are condemned by purists for being a bit too centrist
A case CAN be made that jaysus! Look at WHAT they were up against!
That they accomplished ANYTHING AT ALL is worthy of our praise.
That they survived to find themselves HERE in the fray again? Brilliant!
And it's hard to say Hillary would not do things MUCH differently (leftly)
if the Clintons had another shot at it...now.
When the Republican Contract on America has *gasp* expired.

I mean Hillary DID attempt the dreaded Socialized Medicine!!!!

So the question someone SHOULD have asked MUCH sooner
I why is, Oprah Winfrey, a TALK SHOW host who is NOT a Democrat
(but IS one of the richest and most influential women in the world)
TELLING America who the NEXT democratic candidate WILL be?

Privileged people don't get to BE where Oprah and Obama are
without taking VERY good care of their OWN interest
which, incidentally, are VERY well served by the...republicans.

And if THAT means steamrollering over the crunching bones
of the small trench fought incrimental gains of the boomers
REAL stuff like civil rights, Peace, the WOMAN'S movement.

Well maybe that is why Hillary can't get any traction this time.
She's not rolling over our...bones.

There's NOTHING obama won't roll over. Or back away from.
That IS the assumption that has us all so worried...right?

He's NOT a democrat. He's an Obamacrat. This is ALL about HIM.

So, In the end, sadly, THIS TIME, I side with Foxx.
Asking for a PAPER ballot to WRITE IN Hillary Clinton's worthy name
seems like the ONLY right thing for a tired old boomer to do.

And perhaps the KEY is Sima's statement.
The place to RAISE the big ruckus is in these pre convention manuvers.
To SHOW UP with petitions of Clinton Supporters who will NOT
allow this nomination to be stolen by dirty tricks that date bacf to
Nixon

To WIN this battle, it's what we must be prepared to do.
And yet a lot of winning comes down to what we THREATEN to do.

And we have not...lost...yet.

so we need to sit Dr Dean down RIGHT NOW
and TELL him in no uncertain or conciliatory or practical terms
That we will PENCIL IN Hillary

Before we will VOTE for Barack

...

America!
"You need a mother VERY badly!"

-wendy to captain hook

...

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

I can't disagree with you that the dynamics of his campaign suck in myriad ways, many of which I've documented here at length.

But he does have a solidly progressive voting record in the Senate. He's not a cutting edge Senator, one who shepherds bold initiatives, but his voting record on issues like reproductive choice is excellent.

I will have no problem voting for him, if he's the nominee, in November.

I will remember with great sadness the abusiveness of so many of his supporters, and I will continue to hope he comes down from the lofty cloud of perfection and rejoins us regular earthlings; he will be the better for it. But no way am I going to fail to use my vote to say "no" to Bush's Third Term.

janittdott's picture
Submitted by janittdott on

This really isn't about his voting record, vastleft,
such as it is.

If it was JUST about that I'd hold my nose and...hope.

It's partly about his...attitude...(arrogant, aloof, elitist, sexist)
And his agenda...which I think we ALL agree isn't what he says it is.
And the...odd way...his "followers" are acting ABOUT him.

But it's MORE the FACT that he will not...win.
Certainly not in Wisconsin. The state Bill Clinton swept handily...twice.
(except Obama DIDN'T win my state...or others. I will explain in a sec)

The thing is, maybe Obama wowed them over on the Chicago side
where the three or four big cities and the liberal colleges are
but that is a pretty SMALL part of the...whole state of wisconsin.
Which is almost ALL dairy farms and recreation land.
If he had won over there, Hillary's base is strong over on on MY side.
So they SHOULD have come out about even, the polls said they would.

In Rural Western Wisconsin, there is a flag in every truck window
and every community has a LOT of sons daughters fathers mothers
in The National Guard. (That is how they make stretched ends meet)
They are UBER PATRIOTS and they voted FOR Bush and FOR his war.

Hillary would be up to her muckboots is deep fragrant cow manure
If after 9-11, she had NOT voted for the war, It's her...best vote...here.
And why she just might win in Rural America.

As it took loved ones, they still didn't blame Bush or condemn the war.
They blamed...The Muslims.

I get a few fear and loathing emails...a week...in Rural Wisconsin.
Plus farmers tend to be pro life, pro marriage...Republicans.

And, I hate to break this to the REST of the country, but in the states
where boys are going off to IRAQ and not coming back whole or at all?
MAYBE THIS time they will vote for Hillary Clinton to end the Iraq war
cause it's gone on too long now (and Life was SO good here with Bill!)

But a liberal pro choice democrat (black OR white) with a muslim name to call the war they've DIED for a total mistake he never supported
with a wife who is not proud of her country?

Against a republican pro life war hero with a wife that...is...proud.

Need I finish this sentence? Or just let...Carl Rove do it for us.

That IS a Fairy Tale.

So you say why did Barck win Wisconsin, then?
The fact that democrats DON'T know is what has me so worried.

(It's the open primary stupid.)

In open primary states like Wisconsin,
Republicans can vote for democratic candidates in the primary
Then STILL vote republican in the general election.
It's a ploy as old as...tricky dick..to pick the weaker candidate to run
against.

Hillary got more votes than the ENTIRE republican combined vote.
You think they just stayed home cause McCain has it sewed up?
Hell no, they came, they voted FOR Obama!

The hopeful POINT of the execise is that Hillary did not win.
They did not vote for Hillary, they don't WANT to run against Hillary.
They voted for Obama...in droves.

Cause they have ALWAYS known Hillary can...beat them

And more than ANYTHING it's now it's about Barack's "First Lady".
What SHE said when HE "won" MY state of Wisconsin.

Not Proud of America will NOT play in The Heartland come November.
It won't play with ME now.

Cause being the Leader of the Free World is knowing what NOT to say!

And when Michelle Obama said that...And Mrs. McCain shot back.
Hillary Clinton...who knows the WHOLE country...stayed OUT of it.

And Carl Rove, who'd just stolen my state, smiled.

...

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

All you have is your vote and your influence. I hope you'll hold your nose (if that's the circumstance) and vote against Bush's Third Term in the only meaningful way available to any of us.

horseloverfat's picture
Submitted by horseloverfat on

The people who sell mutual funds will tell you past performance is no guarantee of future results. The Bush's were notable patrons of Planned Parenthood until that became inconvenient to the needs of the Reagan ticket.

I see Obama's voting record as protective coloration - he will act per the wishes of whoever his backers are. HST said give the voters a choice between a Republican and a Republican and they will pick a Republican every time. That is what I expect to happen in November. Ask yourself - why are Obama's point people on healthcare people like Jim Cooper who were instrumental in blocking HRC's initiatives in 1994?

Horselover Fat