Sunday, June 1, 2008

People who think Obama or McCain doesn't matter...

Read an article in the NYT featuring a photograph of angry Clinton supporters, mad about the FL/MI decision. We, of course, know that some (if not many) Clinton supporters are planning to either vote for, or otherwise enable the election of, John McCain in retaliation for what they perceive as an unjust turn of events (a.k.a Sexist Obama stole the nomination from Clinton).

For these people, a timely reminder in the form of this video featuring Douglas Feith, known as one of the architects of the Iraq War (via Josh Marshall):

Still think Either Male Candidate doesn't matter?


Nina Miller said...

It is always good to be reminded of what this war is about.

However, you presume that Obama will get us out of Iraq, or would do a better job than McCain managing our presence there.

While I wouldn't say its impossible, its no sure thing either. Here's why.

1. If you go back to the Samantha Power BBC interview, you'll see that the Obama campaign has no intention of abiding by the promises they've made vis a vis Iraq once they are elected. In fact, it would be "the height of ideology to say that just because I said this, I'm going to impose it." (forgive me if I don't have that exactly right, but I think I do).

From that interview I gather that Obama intends to depend on whatever advice the military gives him. ("He'll convene a new group of experts including people he currently doesn't have access to...") If the generals say get out, he'll get out. If they say get halfway out, he'll get halfway out. I expect the same would be true of McCain.

2. Having paid attention to what happened during the Clinton administration, I also know that if the generals say stay in, we're going to stay in. They will not go against their better judgement because 'some kid who never served' thinks he knows best. They made Clinton miserable and they'll do the same to Barack if they see fit. (not saying I agree with this, just that this may very well happen).

On a different note, cut it out with the "both male candidates" stuff. It is simply not true that Hillary voters care more about the gender of the politician than anything else. In fact, if you look at the P-VP matchups at SurveyUSA you will see that in many cases an Obama-Sebelius ticket actually does worse than, say, an Obama-Edwards ticket *among women voters*. The problem with Barack is not that he is a man. Many of the same women who oppose him now - like me - gave blood, sweat and tears to elect Al Gore and despised Ralph Nader because of a similar dynamic (Nader's total indifference to sexual and reproductive rights and his proclivity for saying there was no difference between Gore and Bush).

Don't assume voters who support Clinton but not Obama are ignorant about McCain, or Bush. In many cases we're anything but, which should give you an indication of just how strongly we feel.

RS said...

The meta-point is this: Senator Obama knows that the USA has to get out of Iraq, and that the Iraqis have to sort it out for themselves. Senator McCain is still stuck in the "we are in it to win it" mindset. That paradigm shift is quite important, IMHO.

As far as I can tell, Samantha Power basically said the 16-month withdrawal timeline was a best-case scenario. It could take longer - but it will happen. Not so sure about that with Senator McCain.

As for the "kid who has never served" - that's probably a good reason to have Chuck Hagel as SecDef. [Not as VP, though.]

You may have strong reasons to not support either Obama or McCain, which is fine (though given the "I am staying home, boys" attitude - hmmmm ;-) ).
Not so sure about all Clinton-supporters - there's some Youtube videos showing them at the 5/31 RBC meeting, or the Hillaryis44 comments log. The latter just reads like a rabid GOP website ("we are waiting for Michelle's Whitey-bashing video!")


Still, feel strongly over what? That a virtual nobody wrested the nomination away from your favorite? As I keep saying - on Feb 6, given racism/sexism/whatever, Clinton and Obama were on an equal footing. What happened after that was basically mismanagement within the Clinton campaign.

I am telling ya - if Senator Obama had not run up the 150+ pleadged delegate lead, Senator Clinton would have won the nomination. Her "big states" and (mythical) "popular vote" arguments would have carried the day.

RS said...

By the way, I don't place much faith in the current SUSA P-VP polling. I think (as others have pointed out) that it is a reflection of name recognition more than anything else.