enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
There's a flaw in this logic...
by upsidedownpoint

I like Kathleen Sebelius for VP.

I think if Clinton supporters have a real problem with her, they should re-examine their feelings; are they rational? Clinton has far more negatives than positives on an Obama ticket, not the least of which is the strong feelings Republicans have for her (they don't like her one bit).

And while the popular narrative is that Clinton has more "experience" and "accomplishments", I have yet to see a side by side list comparing her with Obama that actually bears that out.

On a side note - it speaks volumes about Obama's primary campaign that Clinton's long history of negatives and polarization haven't been in the forefront during this political season. But we shouldn't forget them lest the Republicans remind us this fall.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by spackle

Totally agree. I have a world of respect for Hillary, but I cringe whenever I see someone trot out her experience as a selling point. What has she really done, other than be in the public eye for a long time? She's respected in the Senate, but I don't see a long list of identifiable accomplishments.

The real problem is that, if I were Obama, I wouldn't want Hillary because I wouldn't want to deal with the Clinton crap, and I'd probably have a pretty bad taste in my mouth after the primary season. The idea that the candidate has to pick the runner up as a running mate is riddled with holes. If Clinton had won, I'd tell Obama supporters the same thing. Sorry, Clinton supporters, you have to let this go at some point, no matter how much it hurts.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by Sounder

I don't have a problem with whomever Obama's handlers tell him to put on the ticket. I'm voting, gasp, Republican this year.


Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by devizier

I'm voting, gasp, Republican this year.

---

That's good. Women don't deserve equal pay anyways.

I'm being sarcastic in case anyone's detector is failing.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by alexistyang

Obama: Don't do it!

K.S. should stay in Kansas and Hillary should stay in the Senate. We need them right there fighting for us.

It's tough enough to fight the Republicans and the Racists. You don't want to enlist the aid of the Feminists, Conservative Catholics, and Pro-Livers to bring your candidacy down.

A ticket with a half-Black and half-Catholic is the radical right's dream come true.

Putting K.S. on your ticket gives moderate Catholics (i.e. closeted racists) the acceptable excuse they need not to vote for you: they can't possibly vote for a pro-choice Catholic.

K.S. is making real change in Kansas. Clinton is making real change in the Senate.

Leave them there or put them on your cabinet, AFTER you win the election.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by TheRaven
I'm voting, gasp, Republican this year.
You're not the only one.
Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by TheRaven

it's tough enough to fight the Republicans and the Racists.

Nice try at playing the race card, but we don't accept them here. Labeling those who oppose you as racist is pathetic, especially considering Obama's own racist past. White people are willing to put up with a lot, but we're not going to be bullied into voting for a loser just because he's black.

You don't want to enlist the aid of the Feminists, Conservative Catholics, and Pro-Livers to bring your candidacy down.

What the hell is a "Pro-Liver?" Nice. Well, it figures. That is the kind of spelling ability that you get from a 2nd grade education....

Putting K.S. on your ticket gives moderate Catholics (i.e. closeted racists)
Wow. Simply - wow. So all moderate Catholics are racists according to you. Does wearing your helmet with the word "special" on the side help you think up bizarre ideas like this one?
Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by upsidedownpoint

Indeed. He is one of 27 persons voting Republican this year.

I assume you are another of those? Bully. I had hoped to meet one before they went extinct. Make sure you document your diet and bowel movements before you pass on, for posterity!

We wouldn't want our kids to grow up ignorant of the beauty of political evolution, now would we?

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by donnad

Clinton supporters support her because of her experience, ability and goals, not because she is a woman.

To say another woman might get their vote is like saying male supporters should go with another male just because they are male.

The negatives you refer to are unspecified. Hillary's supporters have heard everything negative possible and still support her. They will vote for the ticket if she is on it. It is that simple.

18 million voters want her for president, so yes, they will vote for a ticket with her on it.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by Opinionated

"Clinton supporters support her because of her experience..."

Give me a break and give it a rest.

She was a wife. Not the Secretary of State. Not Attorney General. Before her stint as First Lady she had ZERO experience as an elected public official. While First Lady she didn't even have a security clearance. Any White House Chief of Staff would have a greater claim to the presidency than Hillary if we base support for her on her time in the White House as Bill's wife.

Governor Sebelius, Governor Janet Napolitano, Governor Christine Gregoire, Senator Claire McCaskill, and Senator Amy Klobuchar are all more experienced and more qualified to be president or vice president than Hillary because they have not based their entire careers on being some body's wife.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by growlee

This is the quickest rewrite of history yet! Hillary morphed from deep-voiced pants wearing shadowmale to soft voiced teary female during the primaries. Lots of those votes had zip to do with her. She is wily and displays irrational entitlement, which her followers have embraced as well. She lost. Where are the others who lost? I don't see Kucinich or Edwards whining about what they want from the winner. She was given the New York senate seat by the powers that be, not by the fruit of her labor.She would have been the first wife of an ex-president to be elected to her hubby's old job. This falls way way short of my vision of the first woman president of the US. I'd sooner have Janet Reno, Madeline Allbright, Oprah, Cher, or Tyra Banks as the first woman president than an old-fashioned wife who played the victim role for decades to manipulate the world into taking care of her, just like her whining is doing right now.

Since she lost she's been rewritten as noble. She's not and never was. Smart, self-centered, political, yes. Noble, not now and not ever before.

Re: There's a flaw in this logic...
by apple444ed
Clinton supporter's are not rational, of course. Is rational
reaction called for just after the Senator graciously
bowed out; what an idiotic demand of the Senator's
ardent supporters.
Let Time work his ancient magic, let him sing his ancient
incantations and sayings of old. Politics will take care of
the rest.
View as RSS news feed in XML