Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 12:34 PM
Original message |
Division Politics - Clear and Present Danger |
|
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 12:36 PM by Steely_Dan
Okay, we all agree that the primaries are battlegrounds. There are a few of us here that have been calling out a warning that if the bickering between the two front runners continues at the current pace, we may start to see a genuine divide created within our party. Others have called this warning so much BS and that those who forward this belief are nothing other than Chicken Littles with too much time on their hands.
True, mudslinging and name-calling have always been a part of primary politics and for the most part, the waring factions and their supporters come together in the end to unite the party for "victory." Normally, I would assess the current state of affairs as no different from the past.
However, over the past few weeks something has been gnawing at me concerning the parameters of this battle. I couldn't put my finger on it. But the bickering and mudslinging had a different tone to it when put into context.
So, what makes this particular round of false accusations, name-calling, etc. etc. different?
Here's my fear.
It seems to me that the support for each of these candidates is starting break down along ethnic and gender lines. This is dangerous and could in fact create irreparable harm to our party. If not, it certainly can create a gap that would not close for a very long time.
Here we are supposedly the party of inclusion, the party that is always there for the underrepresented, the poor and underprivileged. Because of our society and racism in general, these tend to be people of color. We never thought that "race" would ever be a divisive issue among members of our party. How could this be...After all, we a Democrats.
Only under the current scenario, could the issue of race and gender be a centerpiece of the current battle.
What does this all mean? It means this...
This isn't a normal primary. Race and gender are an essential part of the decision making process for many Americans. We'd like to think otherwise, but it is true.
Today's primary is going to tell us a lot about how divided our party is. It is my belief that these two candidates should have seen this coming. They should have put their party and this country first...and NOT their presidential aspirations. They should have seen that any attack on each other that went beyond "the issues" and became personal would send us down a slippery slope. They should have seen that any attack on each other was an attack on all of us.
Will we continue down this slippery slope? I believe that it is already too late.
-P
|
2rth2pwr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Better if we had 2 white males in the lead, Clinton and Obama |
|
should have known better? WTF??
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
completely miss the point of this post?
-P
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
speaks to exactly what my OP is referring to. We can't even talk about this issue anymore without venom. Apparently we are further down that slope than I even thought.
I'm just saying that the two front runners should have been smart enough to see the potential danger that their battle could create. I believe that they both lost sight of this nuance.
And for the record...I've been fighting for the underprivileged for forty years. So, don't even go there with me.
-P
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
goldcanyonaz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. *tap tap tap* is this thing on. |
|
haha, your follow up posts are making me smile.
Thanks.
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
You're right. I suppose people aren't interested. I feel so out of step. I'll just let it die.
-P
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I think I see what you mean and, imho, there will be an ebb and flow |
|
of different constituencies at least until there is a nominee and likely, beyond.
That isn't necessarily something to be worried about. It in part means people are paying attention.
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
I just didn't think that two people who are so smart would allow a "divide and conquer" scenario to take place. I fear for the future of our party. If nothing else, it does prove that racism exists regardless of the party.
-P
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. I have a pet theory that after so many years of Republican rule |
|
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 01:33 PM by sfexpat2000
and Republican media rule, too, that we're somewhat contaminated with their two favorite tactics -- divide and conquer and race baiting. Not that Democrats have never used them but the Republicans have made them into art forms.
When you live in that kind of stuff for so many years, it tends to become "normalized".
/oops
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. Excellent Observation |
|
I suppose the question would be...was there anything that could have been done to stop it?
-P
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. We kept a huge coalition on the left together for the two years it took |
|
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 01:40 PM by sfexpat2000
to get Kerry elected. That the victory was stolen is another matter.
Once Kerry was chosen, people came together. Do you remember that one event where all our living former presidents made a show of being on stage in support of Kerry? I don't remember which one it was but it was remarkably effective.
As to the various bigotries that divide the left, imho those will continue to divide us until we learn the difference between "playing the X card" and talking to each other. lol
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
12. "x" being the variable n/t |
stravu9
(945 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 02:52 PM
Response to Original message |
13. I Think it already has Irreparably damaged our party. |
|
I believe Edwards is the only one who could pull us back together because he has not bought in to all this race baiting crap.
I believe the reason the Corporate World Anointed these 2 is to cripple the Party's base and piss some people off so much they will refuse to vote at all and guarantee the Party survives in name only.
Edwards would easily beat all Republican comers and effect real CHANGE , as in rebuilding the infrastructure beginning within 30 days of inauguration!
The Powers that be do not want real change anymore than they want true Democracy. They want CONTROL which is why our candidates with the exception of Edwards are hand-picked for us.
Without John Edwards kiss the Democrats good bye. They are all but doomed.
|
Steely_Dan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-26-08 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. I agree with most of your post... |
|
As much as people don't want to admit it, I believe we are seeing the Democratic Party is already down the slippery slope...it's too late.
-P
|
2rth2pwr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-27-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
15. See, you said it again. A White candidate would be better. nt |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun Jun 16th 2024, 08:50 AM
Response to Original message |