Hillary or Obama. Whatever.

[lwcon]

Yesterday, I cross-posted some thoughts that have coalesced for me in the course of this campaign. Dropped like a rock at DU, but sparked a very lively discussion at DailyKos.

I also sent it to a friend who has been leaning toward Obama. He wanted to know more about why I didn't just swallow my reservations and hop aboard the "hope" bandwagon. This is what I sent him:

I’d really hoped that Obama was going to be an upgrade to Hillary. That didn’t seem to be too starry-eyed a place to be setting the bar, y’know?

So, watching him in this campaign has been a huge disappointment, ending with methinks the inevitable analysis that as a president (as opposed to as a candidate), Obama has a little more upside and a lot more downside than Hillary. He appears to be somewhat more electable, but he’s also providing less air-cover for himself and for others to run and govern as progressives. At best, he’s Bill Clinton all over again – popular, better than a sociopathic Republican, and frustratingly more beholden to being a people-pleaser than being a change agent (other than, perhaps, stripping the word “change” of most of its meaning).

If Hillary is nominated and loses, we’ll have a lot to regret. Lord knows, we don’t want another sociopath. But I put the blame on Obama for being a bullshit artist who pissed on a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to move the country to the left and not on us who dared to notice.

This is not Nader 2000. People like me are dedicated Democrats, not purist vanity/protest voters. But Obama isn’t a dedicated Democrat. He’s a dedicated Obamacrat, and to use another word from his generation, that sucks.

The evidence is in, as it was after New Hampshire, that Obama has to answer the call to seize the progressive mantle. If he can stop gazing at the mirror (or is it Ronald Reagan’s picture?) for a couple of minutes, he might notice that there is an energized progressive movement just waiting for someone to take them to the Promised Land.

Of course, the Kool-Aid drinkers in the Obama Fan Base think that we’re asking him to rip a picture of the Pope or something. But we’re just asking for him to run as a Democrat in a time when Democrat is by far the preferred brand.

How do you run as a Democrat? You present yourself as a proud representative of the party of ideas that work, that are sane, and that are humane. You point out that the other party hotwired America, went on a bender, and left it a smoking wreck. You’ve got the Jaws of Life, just like FDR did, and you’re going to save us from that wreck and build a better, alternative-energy car like Kennedy built a moonship.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[Birthmark]

1. I agree with you.

Hillary is a Semicrat. The jury is out on Obama, but I'm not hopeful based upon what I've so far seen.

[ccpup]

2. very good Post

it's not often that a reasonable, well-thought out and intelligent Post ends up on the Greatest Page or has a tons of Recommends or Posts. The more salacious, kindergarten-level name-calling and neener-neener-neeners tend to do better at getting attention on DU.

Your sanity and clear-thinking are appreciated, though, and I do agree with you about Obama. I kept waiting for the "there" to be there and kept scratching my head after his speeches, thinking 'WTF?'.

Hillary may not bring her audience to inspired fits of weeping (like Obama's acolytes), but she'll be the perfect person to clean up the absolutely horrendous mess ** has left us with.

[lwcon]

4. I don't know that Hillary will be the perfect person...

... but I've lost my illusions that Obama is offering something better.

More electable, quite possibly.

But running on sweet-smelling hot air and disempowering rhetoric (our problems are nothing bigger than a "partisan food fight," for one particularly odious example) shows weak judgment and weak character. America's poor and middle class have been kicked in the groin by Repubs the last seven years (and, really since Reagan), and to pretend that away in the Repubs' darkest hour is craven lunacy.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[ccpup]

5. sadly, I think you're right.

I believe she'll be the best choice, but that's for you to decide for yourself. I respect that.

But, choosing between the two (Obama and Clinton; Edwards, for some reason, doesn't really compute for me), my heart, my intellect and my reason all point to Hillary.

I hope that somewhere on DU you can find the information you find most useful to help you make your own choice.

[lwcon]

7. I think it is what it is

What you see is what you get with Hillary. And Obama is a slick fellow who can turn bullshit into lemonade and maybe has the better chance of winning, while permanently ratifying every lie we've heard since Reagan.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[ccpup]

8. one thing people have been realizing about Hillary

is that she isn't the Right Wing-created caricature they've come to accept. They're discovering her as intelligent with a firm grasp on the facts and policy (something Obama lacks with his rush to generalize in his sweepingly rhetorical speeches) and is actually quite (gasp!) likable.

Like a traveling circus magician with cheap tricks, Obama's ability to turn bullshit into lemonade loses it's luster fairly quickly when one is seeking something more substantial, more solid and, quite frankly, better equipped to handle what the next President will absolutely need to face the moment after Inauguration.

Again, it's important to make your decision based on information you find useful. I hope my thoughts are both respectful of this as well as helpful.

[lwcon]

9. Obama, too, is intelligent and well-informed

I just think he's selling his soul and ours to become a cult figure, when a proud Democrat will get the job done -- better and with farther-reaching and longer-lasting benefits.
___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[ccpup]

11. yes, he's undoubtedly intelligent

although well-informed I have to see more evidence of. More specifics and less sweeping rhetoric would help with that. As for selling his Soul, I just think he's beginning to believe his own hype and is losing touch with what one has to DO to EARN the trust of the voters. Saying "yes we can" like a mantra may work for some, but evidently not enough to get the most votes.

[lwcon]

13. In the debates, seems clear to me...

That he's knowledgeable about the issues.

I'm not worried about that, just worried that he's whitewashing the very facts that should be most empowering to him and us.
___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[MNDemNY]

3. To heck with HRC and BHO!

You can't drive a needle between most of their policies. I hope they keep at each others throats into a brokered convention, when we can nominate a real Democrat.

[lwcon]

6. I'm hoping that...

... Edwards will get enough delegates that the Official Frontrunners realize that there's gold out thar in the Left. If he gets to be king/queeenmaker, that certainly could help.

Very interesting to note that Kos himself, probably Obama's biggest supporter in the blogosphere, said this yesterday:

Obama’s path to the nomination at this point runs through Democratic voters. And ultimately, while my absentee ballot will be mailed out Monday with his name checked off, I’m pessimistic that he can win. He has shown no proclivity for speaking in unambiguous progressive tones, and it could cost him the election.

When our candidates understand that the majority of Americas want Democrats now, not Republican Lite, we all win.

Here's hoping they will listen. At the last debate, Hillary showed signs of understanding this. Now, the ball is in Obama's court.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[OzarkDem]

10. Collective amnesia about "triangulation" and DLC's failed strategies

Good post. It continues to amaze me how many Dems are now drinking the DLC kool aid.

[lwcon]

22. This brew seems even stronger than the usual DLC mix

Induces total amnesia about the 1960s through 2007.

[Mark Twain Girl]

12. Good post. Yeah, what you said. Sigh. nt

[Yael]

14. What I think they are all underestimating in all of this

is that the base that they are ignoring are the ones who will/could be energized to go out and put massive boots on the ground to win them support.

The collective yawn will echo across this country and the silence will be deafening if and when our party chooses to go the Republican-lite round and rather than employ PEOPLE to do the work, they employ Madison Avenue to sell it during breaks on American Idol.

How far we have fallen.

[Mark Twain Girl]

16. Thank you, Yael; that's a good point.

That's the strength of all the progressives I know and admire -- it doesn't matter how much they get mocked or marginalized, they are the boots-to-the-ground kind of people. And, as much as progressives are smeared as the "loony left" by the pundits, I find myself in the company of very sensible, informed people concerned about media consolidation, health care, the bloated defense budget, poverty, and ecology -- very real, sensible, pressing concerns.

And my frustration right now? We're out there, watching the only game in town move further and further to the right, marketing itself as respectable and electable in the grandiose circles of the Sunday morning chat shows... and we're told we're not needed. We are, in fact, a liability and even embarrassing -- that's a message I'm getting. Forgive my frustration, but I'm feeling like we're increasingly disenfranchised.

[lwcon]

18. But is Republican Lite more electable?

Tell me that the MSM won't be lining up for Big Daddy McCain, because he once gave them a cruller on the "Straight-Talk Express."

Basically, I'm in strong agreement with you, but emphasizing that the benefits of cutting right may be completely illusory. They're selling us out for naught.

[Yael]

19. Yes, yes they are.

Once again, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Yael]

20. Well stated.

[no name no slogan]

15. Issues- and Record-wise, they're reallly not that far apart

Seriously, the differences are minor; downright trivial on a lot of issues. It's more about the packaging that it is the ideology at this point.

I'm not to keen on either one, but I would gladly vote for either one before I'd ever vote for the GOP alternative.

[tblue37]

17. K&R

[Proud2BAmurkin]

21. "Bullshit artist" describes the Reagan pandering

[Elspeth]

23. He's trying to appeal to the GOPers who don't like their candidates or Bush

If he can show the party that he would pull lots of white conservative males over the to (D) side, the party might nominate him as opposed to Hillary, who will probably not get the votes of those disenchanted angry white males. It's an interesting strategy, and he's pulling it off better than Hillary, although I believe Edwards, as a Southern white male, would be more inclined to carry the anti-Bush GOP males, especially with a guy like Jim Webb as a running mate.