Reply #29: I was talking more about idealism in general, not specifically "the war"

[Ken Burch]

Obama welcomes idealists and activists in his campaign. HRC clearly disdains them and campaigns as a cultural conservative("hardworking white people"?).

They may be close on some views, but Obama represents a party(unlike HRC)where activists are respected and welcome. HRC represents a party where only big donors matter. Does that clarify matters for you?

There is nothing so intrinsically superior about HRC that could possibly justify the tone her campaign has taken since March. And more importantly, you and I both know she can't be nominated without the party saying, in effect "to hell with what the voters wanted".

Her nomination would have to be as ugly as Humphrey's was in '68. This is the point you keep refusing to acknowledge. She would have no hope of having everyone in the convention hall stand and cheer her acceptance speech. And she would have no chance of generating passion or enthusiasm in the fall. It would be a dead zone campaign like Humphrey vs. Nixon. That's the kind of campaign we always lose.