"Day of Absence" if Obama is robbed of the nomination?

Will black, red, & brown folks just get so disgusted that they will say the hell with this country - and just stay home?

As a cultural anthropologist, I would like to share some ethnographic data, collected from people who identify as Democrats, who also self-identify as people of color.  These are not netcitizens, and they were from the working class.
This is not a scientific study; just anecdotal evidence.
I am not writing this in academic language and have refrained from using the jargon of my discipline.

There has been much discussion online and in polls about what certain voters would do if the will of the voters is overturned and HRC is given the nomination.So I have been talking to folks about just this very issue;  since the Rev Wright situation began to come to a head and Hillary went totally negative on Obama.  

The people I have talked with represent an ethnographic sample from New York(Rochester, Newburgh and NYC), Pennsylvania (Philly and Pittsburgh), New Jersey( Newark and Plainfield) , Connecticut(New Haven and Hartford),  Washington DC,  Virginia (Loudoun County) , Florida(Miami, Tampa  and Jacksonville),  Georgia (Atlanta)  , Louisiana (Baton Rouge and N'Orleans)  and California (Oakland).

My husband canvassed  barbershops and men in the SRO hotel where he works,    I've been to the beauty parlor,  the botanica, the bodega, on the subway, the bus, and on the phone talking to people I know are rarely  online, have no blogging experience and the majority had no computer.  I deliberately did not talk to those folks I know who are academics, or professionals.  

I've talked to friends who've talked to friends - and I will state here that none of the people I talked with were middle class, nor are they political activists.  They are working class or unemployed, and were African American, Native American, Puerto Rican, Dominican, and Cuban.  I also talked to 3 close  friends who are organizers for SEIU/1199 who talk to low income workers day in and day out, and who travel across the country.     I made calls to friends on 3 Indian reservations.
Here are some of the top  reasons  many poor/working class  blacks, latinos  and Native Americans  gave me for why they will just stay home or not vote for Hillary R. Clinton if Barack Obama doesn't get the nomination. (I can't speak  for Asian-Americans - since I don't work in those communities, so my apologies for leavin y'all out - I just don't want to speak about what I haven't heard).

Fatalism:  Since us colored  folks have  already have seen a white guy  get robbed of a  national election (Al Gore) many of us have a deep seated unspoken (sometimes) belief that if it can happen to a white guy - black folks, and Latinos  know there will be no real protest for a black guy.  He'll just get rolled over by the bus and Hillary will keep on steppin'.  Mexican Americans already saw Hillary throw Richardson a Judas curve.  

Less  vested interest: Since the majority of black folks, and Latinos and Native Americans  are already poorer than white folks the economy argument against McCain won't resonate as much.  We'll just keep on surviving like we always have - no matter who is President.  Foreclosures - most  of us don't own homes anyway.  We live in rental housing or  the projects, or on reservations.   No stocks or bonds or IRA savings to worry about.  We don't drink lattes.  We drink regular coffee or Bustelo.  

Roe v Wade: does not have as much of a hot button resonation in much of the black & Latino community.  The "what about Roe v Wade" argument for supporting Hillary, sadly - though poor women are more adversely affected by lack of access to abortions, if you actually examine abortion rights demos - the bulk of the protestors are not black or latino or Native American.  Many of us are pro-choice but anti-abortion for religious reasons.   Other, younger women I talked to said "well, there will just be more girls pushing strollers".

Feminism: is viewed as a white woman's thing anyway.  Poor women find it hysterically funny to hear middle and upper class white women pushing to get out into the workplace, when we have always worked.  We'll have the same  jobs -waiting on them in shops,  cleaning their houses , scrubbing their toilets, and pushing their babies in strollers while they battle  glass ceilings.  One woman I talked to said succinctly "It will serve the bitch right if she loses.  She's just like all the white female lawyers  I've ever worked for - a real nasty piece of work (this woman is a Puerto Rican legal secretary).  "The women are far worse than the white men",  said she.

Even the black feminist/womanist position is totally unknown, and  not discussed.   It's a class thing.  Patricia Hill Collins is unknown.     Alice Walker is known, because of the Color Purple but not for "womanism".   Oprah rules.  

My Dominican beauty parlor discussion kept heading back to Jaylo's twins and why she gave them funny names, and Mariah Carey's marriage to a young black guy, no matter how often I tried to bring up Hillary.  Hillary was dismissed as a stupid woman who should have cut her husband's balls off when he dissed her.  No sympathy was offered.  McCain was just an old dude who probably would have a heart attack 3 weeks after elected.  Obama - las Domincanas loved him - they think he looks Dominican.  Will be pissed if "los blanquitos" steal the nomination from him.  The 3 operators and a variety of patrons had voted for the first time.  And it would be the last time if he gets robbed.  

The Supreme Court: We don't see anyone there representing us anyway (including Clarence Thomas) so how will it get any different?  As several people pointed out - they killed affirmative action, they killed poverty programs.  So what's the difference?  

Erosion of civil rights: As far as a lot of blacks & Latino, and Native  folks are concerned - they are already eroded. Check out who is stuffing the jails and prisons of America.  Who gets shot and killed by police?  Who gets stopped and frisked?  Sean Bell got mentioned - over and over.  Hillary (meaning Bill) didn't do anything much to change that on his/their watch.  Oh yeah - we "liked Bill".  But we have grown to loathe Hillary.  Bill can stay in his office in Harlem, which Hillary never visits anyway, and y'all can deal with McCain.  

The War:  This is not a draftee army.  Those serving "joined up".   There are few reports of the levels of racism in the military  like those in Vietnam .  Though many folks were against the war, take a good look at anti-war demonstrations.  Please show me photos of demos with a majority of black or latino protestors.

Almost everyone I spoke with had a family member serving.  Many had career military family members.  Why?  To get an education.  

Immigration:  Many Latinos think that McCain will come up with some way to figure out how to keep undocumented's here - no matter what stuff Lou Dobbs is spewing.  Who is going to pick those tomatoes or fruits? Who is going to clean those hotel rooms, or work in sweatshops , or wash dishes in restaurants?   African Americans know they won't be deported - except to prison - so what else is new. Puerto Ricans won't care - they are citizens anyway.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and yes, (shudder ) Farrakhan will have a field day.  BOYCOTT will be the scream of the day.  There will be another  million folk march more than likely.  We will then just set our clocks back to "I have a Dream Time" and know that someday God will see fit to give white folks brains and a black man, or a Latino man  will be President.  Just not now.  And if Hillary goes around hugging colored people we will laugh.  Just like we laugh at Uncle Tom/Tio Taco Republicans.

Some of us will go to the polls to vote in our usual cast of characters - like Charlie Rangel and John Conyers and Maxine Waters, but we won't be pulling a lever for Ms. Hillary.  
Don't be fooled by black pundits (or Geraldo Rivera).  They aren't po' folks.   Our so-called spokespeople , columnists, tv talking heads and reporters are middle class.  And basically speak for themselves not most of us.  Yup - I'm "middle class" too, but have always opted to struggle on the side of the poor - so I do spend much of my time with regular working people - and have almost zero ties to the Colored Intellegensia".  

Don't be fooled by exit polls.  We learn to dissemble at birth;  it's a survival technique.  Christian charity  allows  us tell to white lies (they aren't black lies -cause  no one believes us anyway) , and  "deep in our hearts we do believe - we will get revenge" not someday but  on voting day.  

Poor young folks will just write some new raps or reggeton's - and figure out if it is better to sell weed, or to work in McDonalds.   Weed probably looks like a better deal.  Barack Obama will become a martyr and a confirmation of just how racist America really is - setting back involvement in electoral politics by  young people of color  for another 10 - 20 years.  We might even  see a new Black Panther Party or it's ethnic equivalent rise up - and get shot down.   Obama's  posters  will be tacked up on the wall next to those of Malcolm, Bob Marley, Tupac, Zapata and Don Pedro, or his face will become part of playground graffiti murals, next to portraits of dead rappers.

You see - we really have gotten fired up - but we are getting very uneasy.  We can read.  We can write. We watch TV too.  We see the sneer on Wolf Blitzer's face.  We see insincerity written all over Anderson Cooper.  We can't be bothered to watch Morning Joe.  We don't watch Meet the Press.  Most of us watch FOX news.  We know what "real white people believe",  cause we hear Hannity and O'Reilly and company every day.  They represent "white folks" to some of us.  The only "defender" of Latinos mentioned was Geraldo - who apparently got into a fight with O'Reilly on FOX  about illegal immigrants.  They tune him out when he goes off on other issues.  Two people asked me why he seems to be saying he is Jewish.

So we will probably be the only ones not surprised if something happens to steal the nomination at the last minute (barring an assassination - which we all are still fearful about  (that came up in almost every conversation).

We are not really a force on the net  except on MySpace  and that's just our kids.  How many blacks and Latinos, and Native American's  post here at MyDD?  Those of us who are here don't speak with one voice - and represent a broad range of opinions.  

I wish I had a different opinion.  But what I'm hearing doesn't sound like a set of communities ready to hold their noses and pull a lever for Hillary.  Sounds more like the classic play by
Douglas Turner Ward, Day of Absence:

A satire about an imaginary Southern town where all the black people have suddenly disappeared. The only ones left are sick and lying in hospital beds, refusing to get well. Infants are crying because they are being tended to by strange parents. The Mayor pleads for the President, Governor, and the NAACP to send him "a jackpot of jigaboos." On a nationwide radio network he calls on the blacks, wherever they are, to come back. He shows them the cloths with which they wash cars and the brushes with which they shine shoes as sentimental reminders of the goodies that await them. In the end the blacks begin to reappear, as mysteriously as they had vanished, and the white community, sobered by what has transpired, breathes a sigh of relief at the return of the rather uneasy status quo. What will happen next is left unsaid, but the suggestion is strong that things will never quite be the same again.

http://www.dramatists.com/cgi-bin/db/sin gle.asp?key=634

Perhaps a Day of Absence from the Democratic election might be a good thing.  The Democratic Party (what's left of it) might wake up and  acknowledge that we count too.  More than just a little bit.  And more than rust belt ethnic Republicans in Democratic clothing that everyone is falling over themselves to capture.  Who knows/Quien sabes?

And my last note is that I will be joining them.  I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.  I will vote for down-ticket races,  I will write-in Barack Obama, and I will organize for a Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, just like Fannie Lou Hamer did; only this time it will be called the American Freedom Democratic Party.

I hope that this doesn't have to happen.  But I am ready to make that choice.  And so it seems are many of my folks.  

(crossposted to DKos)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/4/1 95214/6632/597/506888



Display:


'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (2.00 / 2)

You might want to heavily revise your first sentence.


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:53:23 PM EST

Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (1.50 / 4)

If Obama gets more pledged delegates but HRC gets the nomination?

Will HRC use Geraldine "Archie Bunker" Ferraro as her emissary to the African-American community?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:57:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (none / 0)

She'll use Obama as an emissary to the AA community.  Hillary with offer the VP to Obama as a peace offering.  Will he take it? Will Michelle let him?


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:04:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 2)

Senator Clinton isn't going to win the Democratic Nomination unless she wins the Superdelegates; she isn't and won't.


Commissar: Canadian Gal; Proletariat Policemen: ragekage, Lord Hadrian. "For the Proletariat!"
by Lord Hadrian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:09:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (1.00 / 1)

Don't be so cock-sure before tomorrow.  Hillary shall win both NC in a squeaker and IN by double digits.

Supers will not flow in a deluge to Obama as his campaign expects but will slowing move to Hillary as she wins all remaining contests including OR.


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:13:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 1)

Early voting in North Carolina is 40% African American.

But nice try.


Commissar: Canadian Gal; Proletariat Policemen: ragekage, Lord Hadrian. "For the Proletariat!"
by Lord Hadrian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:38:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (1.50 / 2)

You're counting your chickens before their hatched again, Rooster Cogburn.  You don't know who AA who pre-voted, are voting for, if they vote 15-20% for Clinton to save on their gas taxes you'll be crowing a different tune tomorrow my friend.


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:46:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So (none / 0)

Lord is more than a handle?
by linc on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What if Hillary is 'robbed' likewise? (none / 0)

It applies both ways..

THATS WHY WE NEED AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR MORE DEBATES.. SO PEOPLE CAN SEE WHAT THEY ARE BOTH REALLY MADE OF AND MAKE A DECISION THAT THEY CAN LIVE WITH.


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if Hillary is 'robbed' likewise? (1.50 / 2)

There was a contest to get the most delegates.

She lost.

Eventually the party needs to decide on a nominee. The HRC camp wants to keep getting another chance. She couldn't close the deal. It's over.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:31:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if Hillary is 'robbed' likewise? (none / 0)

You confuse delegates and pledged delegates.

You confuse Now and when delegates actually vote.

Many a slip twixt the cup and the lip...


by DTaylor on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:35:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if Hillary is 'robbed' likewise? (none / 0)

Is Obama ahead in pledged delegates?

Is Obama ahead in total delegates?

What's the difference if the vote technically happens at the convention? Technically the POTUS is elected by the Electoral College. But everyone acknowledges the results of Election Day.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:39:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Majority rules (2.00 / 1)

not plurality. Plurality is meaningless when majority is achievable by either candidate. Give it a rest.
by linc on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:42:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Majority rules (2.00 / 1)

What is a realistic scenario for HRC to get a majority of Dem delegates?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:44:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Majority rules (none / 0)

Winning the popular vote.  Unless Obama can MASSIVELY run up the score in NC she is likely to win the popular vote.

And no pretend Florida isn't a state.  And no pretend Michigan isn't a state.  And Obama gets ~2/3 of uncommitted votes as is fair.  And count the Caucuses as 1 vote 1 person.

But if given that he loses then no crying by team Obama when Hillary get the nomination.


by DTaylor on Tue May 06, 2008 at 02:23:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Majority rules (none / 0)

Remember, Bill Clinton won with a plurality of the votes in both elections.


Capitalization is the difference between "I had to help my uncle Jack off a horse..." and "I had to help my uncle jack off a horse..."
by igottheblues on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:47:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What if Hillary is 'robbed' likewise? (none / 0)

Shh... You'll reveal Hillary's Plan C... Convince the electoral college that she's the most qualified and electable.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:25:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Count Michigan and Florida! (none / 0)


by cmugirl90 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Realty check. Neither has 2,024 delegates! (2.00 / 2)

Get over it Obamatrons. You've won nothing...yet. If you're going to threaten to take your toys and go home if you don't get your way--and I say this to all who won't vote for whichever Democrat gets the nomination--then shame on you! Putting your self-interest and ego ahead of the best interests of the public? Life's fine when Obama's got the momentum. But, the moment the mo' shifts, it's a different story? Sorry, but life doesn't work that way. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. It's alright to quote "the rules," as long as they're in your favor? I think not.


by bobswern on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:43:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 1)

You missed the first part of the thought experiment.

What's HRC got to say about Obama to get superdelegates to dump him?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:28:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (none / 0)

It'll be plainly obvious to the Supers, when Obama loses 12 of the last 13 contests.

She won't have to say anything to them if the Supers wish to win in November. . .  the new narrative starting from tomorrow evening: "it's about electability stupid"


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:33:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 1)

So, if Obama wins two or more of the remaining contests, will you pull the plug on HRC and acknowledge he's a stronger candidate than you've given him credit for?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:35:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 1)

Under what conditions will you pull the plug in Obama: How about if he falls behind on the popular vote, he could after tomorrow, even without counting MI.

And what's with you Obamists that scream your incessant: quit, quit, quit.

First stop losing sleep, she won't quit.  Second, the people in my state are more excited about the political process than at anytime in the last 30 years as are voters in IN and every state that has yet to vote, yet you still push that meme. . . better yet, keep pushing it as it creates backlash and more votes for Hillary.


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:44:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (2.00 / 1)

If HRC gets the most delegates in the primaries and caucuses, then I will acknowledge Obama has lost.

Will you acknowledge HRC has lost if Obama gets more pledged delegates?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:46:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (none / 0)

I will acknowledge an Obama win or Hillary win once total delegates surpass 2025 (or whatever the winning threshold is).  For that to happen it isn't about "pledged", it's about "Supers".


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:50:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (none / 0)

Because Obama is not entitled to the nomination because he has the most pledged delegates in this cockamannie system.


by handsomegent on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:21:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why would Blacks vote for HRC? (none / 0)

Cause she'd be a better Prez than McCain? What kind of assumptions go into your question, by the way?


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (2.00 / 1)

Depends on which one's you are talking about.
The brown people I talked to were Dominican and Puerto Rican.  My SEIU friends talked to many "browns" in their union. Salvadoran, Guyanese, Panamanian, Nicaraguan, and yes some Mexican's too.

Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:58:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (2.00 / 3)

HRC supporters have such an overpowering sense that their candidate is entitled to the nomination--even after coming in second place--that it doesn't occur to them that Obama supporters might perceive the superdelegates overturning the will of the primary voters as being illegitimate.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:01:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (none / 0)

Hillary will have won the popular vote even without MI so the supers will have confirmed a legitimate victory with their vote for Hillary.


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:06:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Blue people, green people? (none / 0)

Orange people?

We all deserve more information...


Universal healthcare IS a Democratic value
It's been defeated
Obama has the best $PIN that money can buy.
by architek on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:10:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

so what? (none / 0)

Winning delegates trumps whining about the popular voter.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:26:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (none / 0)

I think that Obama has felt that he's somehow magically entitled to this nomination ever since 2 Lincoln's bithdays ago.  That ridiculous caucus in Iowa where Republicans are allowed to vote as well as Dems- for- a- day Independents fit in nicely with his thurst for power.


by handsomegent on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:26:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 'Brown' people are going big for Hillary! (2.00 / 1)

So nobody told Hillary the rules.  And this race would already be over if it weren't for republicans in Texas.


by reggie23 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary has won the "brown vote" (2.00 / 1)

throughout the primary. The people who you are talking to must have been kool-aid drinkers from the beginning. Before the primary is even over Barack is already bleeding "brown voters" to McCain.
 
"Barack did the Constitution just like he did Hillary. He was riding dirty."
by LatinoVoter on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:16:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your threats (2.00 / 2)

betray your agenda.

You harm Barack Obama with this.

Barack Obama will campaign for Clinton if she wins.  

Another wannabe academic.

Got tenure?  No way.  


by TomP on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:56:44 PM EST

paint a scenario where HRC gets the (2.00 / 1)

Dem nomination... and Obama campaigns hard for her.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:58:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: paint a scenario where HRC gets the (2.00 / 0)

Scenario,
Hillary wins IN by double digits
Hillary wins NC by 1%
Hillary sweeps remaining contests including OR.

Definitive lead for Hillary in popular vote allows supers the cover they need to swing to Hillary.


by wasanyonehurt on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:09:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: paint a scenario where HRC gets the (2.00 / 1)

You are correct. I'm an Obama supporter and I recognize that if Clinton wins NC tomorrow the whole game has changed. But she has to win NC for that to happen.


by elrod on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:55:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: paint a scenario where HRC gets the (none / 0)

Which is a giant task. The idea that she will is pretty preposterous. Just as preposterous as was the fairly commonplace speculation that Obama would win PA. There's no evidence for this, and anyone saying so is just a slave to the polls and a fool.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:28:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your threats (2.00 / 0)

Not threats.  Just observations.  Sorry you feel threatened.  


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:59:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Cute rhetorical game, (none / 0)

but quite disengenuous.

I don't feel threatened by you. You are weak.  Your diary is an admission of weakness.  

So play out your silly games.

You make threats to Democrats to hold your breath unless Obama is nominated and by doing so, you harm Barack Obama.  

I see children of privilege talking tough.  Nice try.  


by TomP on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cute rhetorical game, (none / 0)

I am not hurting Barack Obama.

Just pointing out that from some people's perspective - HRC is hurting what they see as the Democratic Party and a democratic process.  

Who are the "children of privilege" you see?


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary Wins CA, TX, FL, NM... (2.00 / 2)

...and she's gonna' kick butt in PR, too.

Exactly who's winning the Hispanic vote? Please, tell me.

Another O'bloviator in this thread seems to have made the determination that Obama's already won? I guess everyone else missed that story. So, he's already nailed 2,024 delegates? Hmmmm....thanks for the scoop. NOT!

What planet, what universe, what astral plane are some of these Obama supporters living in? Please, tell me that!

It's a freakin' land of make believe. It's a freakin' fairy tale! Bill's right! It's a damn fairy tale! Distort the truth often enough, and long enough, and perhaps it'll become the truth?

Hardly! Reality, deal with it!


by bobswern on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:51:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Same old shakedown, heh, hennie pennie? (none / 0)


by lombard on Mon May 05, 2008 at 06:59:12 PM EST

Re: "Day of Absence" if Obama is robbed (1.50 / 2)

I'm confused.  Polls indicate all the demographics you cite as supporting Hillary, with the exception of AA's.  Maybe the polls indicating this outcome are inclusive of voters only, a phenomenon perhaps not indicative of the (homeless) demographics you rely on.  


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:00:12 PM EST

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 1)

So, basically, we're going to be held hostage by African-Americans because it's there way or the highway. Well, what about the other half the Democratic electorate, which instead of having a "day of absence", speaks loud and clear for John McCain in November? Is that not as important?


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:00:14 PM EST

would you vote for McCain over Obama? (2.00 / 1)

Why?

What position did you take when people were considering Nader in the 2000 election?


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:03:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What planet are you on? (none / 0)

Apparently it's the world of reverse math!

Neither candidate has the delegates to obtain the nomination yet. Deal with it!


by bobswern on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:54:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 2)

They're going to see their candidate, Senator Clinton, lose fair and square and then they'll have the choice of singing kumbaya or electing John McCain.

Simple as that.


Commissar: Canadian Gal; Proletariat Policemen: ragekage, Lord Hadrian. "For the Proletariat!"
by Lord Hadrian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:03:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 2)

Ahem, right now the nomination is being held hostage by the so called "white working class", but I guess you have no problem with this.


Unable to rec or rate Still supporting Obama
by astoria gooner on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:03:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

The electorate is almost evenly split--what's hard to understand? Everyone is important.


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:56:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

agreed


Unable to rec or rate Still supporting Obama
by astoria gooner on Tue May 06, 2008 at 09:26:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 2)

No one comoplained when people of color voters made the difference getting Bill Clinton elected.
Hostage?  I think not.  

A backbone of this party - yes.  Loyal - to a fault.  But...and that's the big but, the pursuit of openly racist voters has caused some folks to take stock.  


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:05:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

So is it your contention that only racists vote for HRC?  That's an explosive statement. I'm voting for the best candidate, imo, and I believe in everyone playing by the rules.  This is like Rev. Wright (sorry for bringing this up) repeating the charge that the U.S. government created the HIV to decimate people of color--it's called paranoia.


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

dishonest accusation (2.00 / 1)

no one said ANYTHING about "only racists voting for HRC."

as usual, if you can't argue the facts make soomething up or change the subject.


the time to rise has been engaged.
by catchaz on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:22:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: dishonest accusation (none / 0)

Make something up or change the subject?  What are you talking about?  I always speak to the posts--read my comments. The poster was relating the results of her informal poll.  One of her comments was that if BHO doesn't get the nomination, they would feel as though it was a conspiracy to take him down.  If you read my comment more carefully, you'll see that I equate that sentiment with the same kind of paranoia evidenced by Rev. Wright's statements about AIDS. I believe in speaking honestly, even if it's not entirely complimentary, and I've consistently done this.  This is the second time I've said anything about Rev. Wright and the first time it was to insist that I certainly didn't hold BHO responsible for anything his pastor said.    


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:31:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: dishonest accusation (none / 0)

And here you go.

Barack Obama will become a martyr and a confirmation of just how racist America really is - setting back involvement in electoral politics by  young people of color  for another 10 - 20 years."


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:34:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: dishonest accusation (2.00 / 2)

Yeah -

Like you are some big feminist/womanist.
And let pass all the misogynistic stereotypes in the diary - not to mention TRing me - simply because the offensive material is in quotes.

You know - you are doing your absolute best to polarize this election on racial terms - not me, amiga mia.


by johnnygunn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:47:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That'sNot... (2.00 / 1)

...what the diarist is saying at all...If the SD's overturn the pledged delegate leader the AA's and others will see this as a "stolen" election (and rightfully so) and exercise their right to sit out of the GE...Remember a competitive Dem must carry 80% of the AA vote in an average turnout of the GE to have a shot at winning...


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:37:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That'sNot... (none / 0)

I'm not disputing the kind of coalition we need to win the election.  But the REAL rules say the superdelegates are supposed to exercise their judgement.  Nothing requires them to vote for the person with the most pledged delegates.  Remember that some of those pledged delegates are from states that hold caucuses, which are most certainly not one person, one vote.  I'm not taking away BHO's success, but the idea that one constituency should be supreme over all really strikes me as antithetical to democracy.  I'm looking for fairness for all.


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:53:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That'sNot... (2.00 / 1)

I understand that is the rules about the SD's.  However if 200 white SD's overturn the AA candidate who gained more pledged delegates from the voters of the USA it will be perceived as being "stolen" and people will act accordingly....


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That'sNot... (none / 0)

Ok, I respect your opinion, but I honestly feel that we all need to hold each other to the same standard--that standard for me is always going to be truth.  


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:03:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That'sNot... (2.00 / 1)

The truth to you may not be the truth to someone else...sorry


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:05:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That'sNot... (2.00 / 1)

I understand about perception, but the rules are clear.  Of course, that doesn't mean that the superdelegates won't take perception into account when casting their votes.


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:10:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

Yikes TinaH - you really do know how to twist words.

Am I a racist because I voted for HRC here in NY - she is my Senator.  


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:03:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

I didn't say that.  Your diary said that some of the people you polled would feel that US was hopelessly racist if HRC was selected over BHO, because they would feel that the Democratic Party chose to hold onto 'ethnic' Rust Belt voters, instead of them.  What precisely am I supposed to infer from this?


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:07:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

Selected over Obama if he had the most delegates.

If he wins the most delegates - and somehow a backroom deal goes down - that is how it will be viewed. Hence the use of the term "robbed".  


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:22:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

Perception vs. Reality.  Never a good thing. I'm sorry people will feel this way.


by TinaH1963 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:32:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

then why did you write: (none / 0)

"the pursuit of openly racist voters has caused some folks to take stock."

who are you accusing of doing the pursuing???  


by jentwisl on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:18:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: then why did you write: (none / 0)

Because the way folks viewed it - particularly in PA (these were some of the strongest remarks from Pittsburg) HRC was courting not only a rascist newspaper but a group of voters who more often than not vote Republican and are pretty right wing in their racial views.


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:25:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 3)

I don't think Hillary is pursuing racist voters. But there is no doubt that racist Democrats are more likely to vote for her over Obama. The polling in OH and PA showed about 9% of her voters saying that race was "very important" in the decision.

And then there are anecdotes like the Indiana cretin who thinks Obama is the anti-Christ from the Middle East.

But is Hillary Clinton sending dog whistle signals to these voters, like the way Ronald Reagan did in 1980? No.

It's just like Obama getting votes of sexist Democrats who don't think a woman should be President. Is Obama seeking those voters? Of course not. But they vote for him over Clinton.


by elrod on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:59:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (none / 0)

Elrod - I must respectfully disagree. I have never once seen HRC strongly denounce the idea that BHO is a Muslim, never once strongly affirm that he is a patriotic American.  She has instead affirmed McCain's patriotism.  A bit odd I might say.


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:06:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (1.75 / 4)

How is it her responsibility to debunk rumors attributed to him?  BTW, has he debunked her "trustworthiness"?  Uh, no, he inflamed it.


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:11:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 1)

If the other half of the Democratic electorate is showing up loud and clear for McCain, a candidate who currently hold a 0 rating from the League of Conservation Voters and a 0 rating from NARAL, then they're hardly a part of the Democratic electorate anymore.


by The Distillery on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:08:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Day of Absence" (2.00 / 1)

This is the problem: Jim and Nancy from rural Ohio don't give a crap about what McCain's NARAL or Enviromental ratings are. This is NOT an issues election and never has been. It's all about how the media is portraying canidiates. Right now, the media portrays McCain as a liberal Republican who is a "maverick". They will be more comfortable voting for him than Obama.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:00:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Just to clarify (2.00 / 4)

By "if Obama is robbed" you mean "if Clinton beats Obama according to the rules", right?

In other words, what you advocate is that, if Hillary wins, we should nominate Obama for fear of your day of absence?


by bobbank on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:03:49 PM EST

Re: Just to clarify (2.00 / 1)

Bob, the diarist is not kidding here.  The possibility is very real that this will happen, whether Hillary wins fairly or not.  These people are angry and will likely not be convinced that Obama's loss would be legitimate in any circumstance.


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:06:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (1.00 / 1)

I can't believe people of color, or not, even though this diary addresses people of color only, would not support the Dem nominee, unless they are people of color with means.  I only need to bring up Katrina, 3 strikes, etc. They will rely on McSame to change the landscape?  I can't believe they would not recognize the potential damage to their own intersts.


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:14:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (2.00 / 2)

As noted by the diarist, these folks don't really notice a difference in their lives no matter who is in the White House.  Witness the litany of issues above dismissed as the problems of middle class persons.


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:21:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (1.00 / 1)

Oh no!  AAs were fully aware of the benefit to their lives a 90's Clinton presidency afforded them.


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:26:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How... (2.00 / 1)

...the hell do you know??


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:40:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How... (1.00 / 1)

Huh?


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:45:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How... (2.00 / 1)

AAs were fully aware of the benefit to their lives a 90's Clinton presidency afforded them.

How do you know??


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:51:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (none / 0)

Would you like to enumerate those benefits?

I'm curious - how did the lives of working class, and under and unemployed blacks, Puerto Ricans and Native Americans improve under Bill Clinton?

Why do we owe eternal alliegence to him, or to his wife?  If anything - he squeaked into office via our votes - yes, with help from Ross Perot, but just where are the great gains in civil rights, reversal of the criminal justice abuses  that took place under Clinton?  


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:49:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (1.00 / 1)

24,000,000 new jobs.  You telling me no people of color got any?  


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:56:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (2.00 / 0)

You can find those statictics in the following report:

Clinton-Gore Administration Accomplishments: 1993 - 2000


by Hurdy Gurdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:59:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (1.00 / 1)

Thanks.  Too much effort to google to reply to these types of comments.


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:01:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that report is a white house press release (none / 0)

not a report.  

Interesting though.  Do you know what the effect of welfare to work really was?  Have you ever had to deal with families where a single parent mom had to go work cleaning roadsides while sick with asthma - and no one to babysit and not enough money to pay for childcare?  

Suggest you look at some other sources for your data on how wonderful life was under the Clintons and the Bushes - for the nations poor.

During the Clinton Administration I worked in East and Central Harlme on an infant mortality project.  Do you realize that in some areas we have higher infant mortality rates than in 3rd world countries?


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:58:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that report is a white house press release (2.00 / 0)

You may want to compare the Clinton legacy with Obama's Illinois senate legacy.  I'm not very hopeful that Obama would do better.

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/4/13 2058/1375/31#31


by Hurdy Gurdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:35:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that report is a white house press release (2.00 / 1)

NeciVelez,

I don't take much stock of anecdotal evidence.  I very much prefer solid statistical evidences of success/failure.  I'm impressed by the following achievements of Clinton Administration taken from the reference I provided in my previous post above:

Household Income Breaks $40,000 for First Time in History. Income for median households rose $1,072, or 2.7 percent, from $39,744 in 1998 to $40,816, marking an unprecedented fifth year of significant growth in income. In 1999, the median income of African American households increased from $25,911 in 1998 to $27,910 -- an increase of $1,999, or 7.7 percent, which is the largest one-year increase ever recorded. The income of the median Hispanic household, adjusted for inflation, increased from $28,956 in 1998 to $30,735 in 1999 -- an increase of $1,779, or 6.1 percent, which is the largest one-year increase ever recorded. [Census Bureau, Money Income in the United States: 1999, 9/26/00]

Unemployment is the Lowest in Over Three Decades. Unemployment is down from 7.5 percent in 1992 to 3.9 percent in September, the lowest in more than three decades. The unemployment rate has fallen for seven years in a row, and has remained below 5 percent for 37 months in a row -- over three full years. Unemployment for African-Americans fell to the lowest level ever recorded, and for Hispanics it remains at historic lows. [Bureau of Labor Statistics]

Highest Homeownership Rate in History. The homeownership rate reached 67.2 percent in the second quarter of 2000 -- the highest ever recorded. Minority homeownership rates were also the highest ever recorded. In contrast, the homeownership rate fell from 65.6 percent in the first quarter of 1981 to 63.7 percent in the first quarter of 1993. There are almost 9 million more homeowners than in 1993. [Bureau of the Census, 7/26/00]

Lowest Poverty Rate Since 1979. In 1999, the poverty rate dropped from 12.7 percent to 11.8 percent, the lowest rate in two decades. Since President Clinton and Vice President Gore passed their Economic Plan in 1993, the poverty rate has declined from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 11.8 percent in 1999 - the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1964-1970). There are now 7 million fewer people in poverty than in 1993, and over 2.2 million, or over 30 percent, of this decline occurred during the past year. [Census Bureau, Poverty in the United States: 1999, 9/26/00]

Largest One-Year Drop in Child Poverty in More than Three Decades. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore child poverty has dropped by 25.6 percent -- from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 16.9 percent in 1999. While this is still too high, it is the lowest child poverty rate since 1979 and includes the largest one-year decline since 1966, which occurred from 1998 to 1999. The African American child poverty rate has fallen 28.2 percent since 1993, and dropped from 36.7 percent in 1998 to 33.1 percent in 1999 -- the largest one-year drop in history and the lowest level on record (data collected since 1959). The Hispanic child poverty rate has fallen by 26 percent since 1993, and dropped from 25.6 percent in 1998 to 22.8 percent in 1999 -- the lowest level since 1979. [Census Bureau, Poverty in the United States: 1999, 9/26/00]


by Hurdy Gurdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:47:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that report is a white house press release (none / 0)

nice try - but still a press release.

Try using the actual census data sets - which I work with. Or CDC databases.

Take a look at infant mortality.
AIDS - rates rising among women (mostly minority)
Geriatric poverty and illness
Diabetes
High Blood pressure

Then take a look at incarceration rates
instances of police brutality
the rise of hate crimes

The impact of NAFTA

Not all these things happened under GWB's watch.


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:34:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that report is a white house press release (none / 0)

Please provide links to your claims.


by Hurdy Gurdy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:47:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (none / 0)

Some could say that your comment is similar to what one would expect coming from a Republican. Mind you, I am not saying you are a Republican.


by zenful6219 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:05:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 2)

if "Hillary won fairly" I don't think anyone would be taking these stances.

Using dog whistles, and kitchen sinks is not viewed as "fairly" by a lot of folks.

If she has more delegates (DNC rules), wins more states ...folks would accept gracefully and head to the polls to vote as Dems like they always do.

But this hasn't been fair.  Folks are not blind.
The problem is, we rarely hear from most of these folks on forums like this one, or DKos, or TPM, or HuffPo.


Anthropologists for human diversity; opposing McCain perversity
by NeciVelez on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:19:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 2)

But notice how you attempt to conflate actual rules (the person with a majority of delegates wins) with make-believe (my own interests are served by promoting the candidate who won the most states).

That isn't what it means to abide by a fair process.  You don't get to invent new rules as your go along.

Those "folks" you keep referring to - those are the "folks" being polled when they choose Hillary over McCain.  Those polls don't exclude Obama supporters, you know.


by bobbank on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:24:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (none / 0)

They are playing calvin ball.


by DTaylor on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:40:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 1)

Perception is reality...If they perceive the election is stolen from them they will act accordingly.

Just like working class whites perceive this gas tax holiday is really going to happen...


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:42:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (none / 0)

Those "folks" you keep referring to - those are the "folks" being polled when they choose Hillary over McCain.  Those polls don't exclude Obama supporters, you know.


by bobbank on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:00:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 1)

Yeah I know but I'm sure the question does not read:

If Barack Obama is leading in pledged delegates at the end of the primary and the Superdelegates overturn this decision and award the nomination to Hillary Clinton who would you vote for in the General Election, Hillary Clinton or John McCain?

And these polls have NO WAY of determining turnout, period!


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:04:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (1.00 / 1)

"fair" is subjective, as I read your diary and comments.  There is no "fair" way for Hillary to win the nomination, as I understand your points.
I don't have a crystal ball, but I will tell you that those who vote against their own interests deserve what they get.  People of color are vested in the Dem party.
Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:24:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 1)

They may be more vested with democracy.


by mady on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:27:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (1.00 / 1)

Wonderful concept.  Now pay the bills with that.


Sen. Obama: I'm watching. I'm listening. I vote.
by ChitownDenny on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 1)

I'm poor by most standards and bill paying is tough.  Disenfranchisement is tougher.


by mady on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:38:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jarhead (2.00 / 1)

Amen Count Michigan and Florida


by DTaylor on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:41:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just to clarify (2.00 / 1)

And an even greater number of people say they will do the same if Obama is nominated.  So where does that leave us?

Here's the good news - all those polls that show Barack tied with McCain, or show Hillary beating him?  They implicity take these effects into account.

No, I think if the diarist were concerned about unity he would not threaten to stage a walk-out in retaliation to the results of a fair process.


by bobbank on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:19:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]