Ok - first post - taking a deep breath and diving in!
RBW: Your comments/questions are interesting. With regard to some people (women and men alike) thinking Hillary can't win, I think much of this may be due to an estimation as to what the American voting public really will do when in the voting booth. Yes, she is polarizing, but so are most of the people who look likely to run. She has positions that many people disagree with among the Democratic base, but so do all of the other likely candidates. My own opinion, is that, regardless of whether people personally support her candidacy or not, they do not trust that the American people will - at the end of the day - vote for a woman for president in significant enough numbers. I'm cynical so I tend to be of that opinion myself. This is also why I tend to believe that Obama can't win. Of course, I'd love to be proved wrong, but I rarely lose money betting on my own cynicism.
I decided, however, after the 2004 elections that I wasn't going to let my support for a candidate be determined by calculations of who is most electable. In 2004, I initially supported Dean because I loved his passion, his grassroots committment and his substantive positions. I became persuaded, however, that the only person who was "electable" was Kerry and we know how that turned out. I think we, as a party during the primaries, try to parse through too much who can win the general election based on stats rather than candidates who have passion, charisma and substantive positions that resonate. So, my decisions in the upcoming cycle will be based solely on who I believe in, rather than who I believe others will vote for. Of course, pragmatism is called for - I won't be voting for the Peace and Freedom Party candidate or Dennis Kucinich, if he runs again. But, I certainly do not plan to be swayed this time by the "he/she can't win" argument.
--speaktruthtopower--
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
STTP
I think that your analysis on what folks think is dead on when it comes to it being about gender and the secrecy of the polling both; same is true on race, as we saw with Doug Wilder years ago -- folks say one thing, but do another.
I agree on not taking the electability approach (as caveated by reason like you indicated). I was a Harkin fan in 1991-92 when Clinton ran. Once Clinton became the candidate, I put my support behind him.
However, if the Dem Party was more disciplined, they, like the Reps, would annoint a candidate early and work all out to ensure that person was delivered to victory.
But as you know, coulda, shoulda, prada.
Post a Comment