The Nonsensical Idea That Hillary Supporters Have A Reason To Hate/Be Disgusted By Obama

[ihavenobias]

The only (non-legitimate) reason to be "revolted" by Obama is resentment that he's "interfering" with Hillary's rightful ascension to the presidency.

Seriously, otherwise what is it?

-Did Obama run fear mongering, Republican style 3am ads?

-Did Obama and his wife praise McCain and say he was more qualified and experienced than Hillary to be president (and that McCain loved his country, implying Hillary didn't)?

-Did Obama have an "as far as I know" moment?

-Did Obama go on Bill O'Reilly's show in order to hit anti-Hillary softballs out the park to the delight of Republicans everywhere? If he did, did he at least try to attack the Republican nominee and bring up Reverend Hagee?

-Did Obama decide to drag out the primary allowing McCain to save all of his money (and save his high ratings since no one is covering him in the MSM)?

-Did Obama do his best Karl Rove imitation and try to paint the other Dem candidate as an "out of touch elitist"?

Obama and his campaign may have taken some jabs here and there (obviously), but clearly their tactics have been FAR less damaging to the party. And the few jabs they did take were AFTER Hillary's GOP style gutter/kitchen sink campaign began, so even if you can manage to dig up a couple of examples please keep them in that context.

It seems to me that Clinton supporters who can't stand Obama only feel that way because, like I already said, they resent him for standing in the way of their original candidate of choice AND they have bought into her republican style talking points regarding Obama. She has driven up his negatives because it was the only way she could stay in the race. To some extent I don't blame her for that as it's entirely possible Obama would've gone negative had he been behind. With that said, she has taken it WAAAAAY too far.

Unfortunately the big takeaway from all of this is that McCain is far more likely to win in November, and that's something that none of us should be happy about, regardless of which Dem we support.

[ClayZ]

1. K and R

[Indydem]

2. Who said anything about hate???

I didn't vote for Obama in the primary. I don't hate him. I will vote for him in November if he is the nominee. But when put up against Senator Clinton, he is underqualified, an elitist, and a joke.

[TNOE]

3. RW Talking Points

Elitist? (i.e. SMART) A Joke? Hope and intent is a joke?

[kid a]

4. You proved the OPs point - perfect response!

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[newmajority]

13. Again with the elitist bullsht?

When did Hillary Clinton ever live in a house that had less than 20 rooms in it?

When did Hillary Clinton pay off her student loans?? Oh, she never had any?

Who made 110 million dollars this decade?

Who belongs to a right wing evangelical CULT which believes God chooses ELITE leaders to establish a theocracy??

[Heather MC]

149. Oh oh I know I know, Mrs. McCain, right!

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[global1]

25. So If He Is Underqualified, An Elitist, And A Joke - Why Would You Vote For Him In Nov?.....

do you hate America? Are you unpatriotic?

[Indydem]

41. Perhaps English is your second language, or perhaps u can't read...

But I implicitely said, that when placed against Senator Clinton, he is underqualified, an elitist, and a joke.

Against McSame, he is still inexperienced, but not nearly as aloof or elite as McSame, and his policies are far more progressive.

Apples to apples, and apples to oranges.

[Independent-Voter]

102. So, compared to the rich old white guy, and the rich old black woman, the black dude who grew up on

food stamps is elitist? God damn, but you Hillary supporters are some dumb fucks.

[goletian]

141. no, no... you can be honest. tell us what you really think. - nt

[yellowcanine]

26. " I don't hate him.......but.....he is underqualified, an elitist, and a joke."

Well I guess it is safe to say you don't like him much then. So what has he done to deserve such dislike, to rephrase the question in the OP?

[Indydem]

33. Posted reply to wrong line... n/t

[yellowcanine]

42. Well it looks as if I am in good company here then as several others apparently are

puzzled by your nonsensical statement. Maybe it is you that has a problem with the language?

[ihavenobias]

43. I gave specific examples. You gave three baseless insults you didn't even *attempt* to back up

Have at it then, if it's so obvious, explain how he's underqualified.

Explain how he's elitist (both on his own and also next to Hillary since you framed it that way).

And finally, explain why he's "a joke".

We're waiting.

[elocs]

46. Definition of "elite". Actually know what a word means before tossing it around.

A group or class of persons or a member of such a group or class, enjoying superior intellectual, social, or economic status.

"Economic status"--I think Senator Clinton and her husband have many more millions than the Obamas.

"Social (status)"--I think that Senator Clinton being a former First Lady and her husband being a former President have the Obamas beat on that point also with many more doors easily opened to them.

"Superior intellectual (status)"--right, I would give that one to Obama.

Both Clinton and Obama are of the elite inasmuch as they are members of a very exclusive club that only has 100 members--the U.S. Senate.

Clinton co-opts much of her husband's experiences as President as her own experiences and claims big points for just being there in order to make her more "qualified". Much of her "experience" is likely in the same class as her being under sniper fire.

I do not hate Senator Clinton either because hate is self destructive, but I, and many millions of other Americans have voted for Senator Obama or caucused for him because we believe he is the best choice for President, better than Senator Clinton, and to have you simply dismiss him as being a "joke" is pathetically sad.

[Indydem]

50. WRONG!

Look up ELITISM, not elite.

elitism (uncountable)

1. The belief that a society or system should be run by an elite.
2. The superior attitude or behaviour associated with an elite.

Its #2 that we have a problem with. He acts better than those of us with a blue collar career and treats us with disrespect.

[Cassandra]

56. In what way does he treat you with disrepect?

Should he apologize for having gotten an education? For using that education on behalf of the poor? Do we need another Bush; proof positive that even an elitist with all the right credentials can be as dumb as dirt?

[elocs]

97. Well, I'm a blue collar worker who does not feel like Obama has treated me with disrespect.

Ater 8 years of Bush I would love to have a President whom I know is more intelligent than I am and I don't care if it is obvious. I don't think that Obama in any way acts condescending and seems like a pretty down to earth guy. It's Hillary's act that I don't buy--a former First Lady who is just one of the regular people. Right.

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cui bono]

112. Are you fucking crazy???

Clinton is the one who is treating you with disrespect. Offering you a Tax Holiday that is unanimously panned by both conservative and liberal experts. She's giving the politically expedient carrot just before a big election day, gee, now why would she do that. Can you say "pander"? Is that not disrespectful.

Obama, in contrast, doesn't talk down to the public. He is giving the truth even though it may give him less votes in the short run, but he trusts that people will understand that he's in it for the long haul and is telling it like it is. He doesn't make shit up and hope the uninformed, uneducated public buys it. He expects more from us and wants us to expect more from him.

Not to mention your idiotic run to the word "elitism" instead of "elite" as if that changes your argument. It's so hard to keep reading this stupidity that has taken over Hillbots. You guys need a rehab center to get over your blind and misplaced adoration.

[juno jones]

166. Sounds like the attiutude espoused by Hillary's prayer group.

Read Jeff Sharlet. If you don't you are uninformed.

http://jeffsharlet.blogspot.com/

There are links to a number of articles there.

Don't see Obama mixed up in that, sorry.

I'm blue collar- a baker and a cook. Never earned more than $13,000 in my life. I'm pretty well-learned though, and I've done a lot of research in this election. Reading what is known as 'primary sources', not just campaign literature and sound bites. I've never heard or read Obama say anything denigrating towards the working class. I don't really feel intimidated by him, Just as I know he probably couldn't bake to save his soul, I'm not one to run for pres. Different strokes and I like the fact he doesn't go all ballistic when crisies occur- unlike either Hillary or McCain. Among other things, of course.

Frankly, I'm more offended by Hillary and her boilermaker moment, slamming down a vile concoction she would never drink in a million years in an obvious attempt to pander to the working class. THAT is presumption and paints the fact that she must have a very distorted idea of what working class are like.



If you enjoy being uninformed working class, go right ahead, but you are only putting out talking points that have no substance.

[jettison]

177. This post says SO much about the hatred coming from Hillary folks

"1. The belief that a society or system should be run by an elite."

Do you not believe this? I not only want my country run by an "elite", I want him to be the MOST elite. As elite as possible, the smartest man on the planet. Is that really a bad thing for you? Aren't you tired of the non-elite running our country, George Bush and company? I don't need idiots in the Whitehouse any longer. The "elite" as you say, are more capable of also making "elite" decisions. Please, for all that is great and good, bring on the elite. I'm hoping he's 10x smarter then the common man.

"2. The superior attitude or behavior associated with an elite."

Ummm, it's the president. The President of the United States of America. Do you think it's humanly possible to hold that position and NOT feel somehow superior to most people around you? Heck, I see co-workers get a 2 dollar an hour raise and think they're better then everyone around them. He is the muther flippin' President. OF COURSE he's an elitist. Do you not believe that Bill Clinton thought himself elite? Do you really think that because a candidate knocks back a few shots for the camera that she doesn't think herself elite?

Please don't be taken in by photo ops in the media. ALL of these people are elitists. That's more then fine with me. I don't need them to be my best friend... I need them to run a country that's in dire need of people in possession of "elite" minds.

[havocmom]

51. Obama, elitist? Who grew up struggling and who grew up comfy upper middle class?

Who worked for little for the poor and who worked for big law firm and WalMart Board?

Who is using grassroots and who started flush with fat cat donors maxing out early?

Who is doing populist and who is just campaigning the GOP style?

Sorry, your argument is a lame attempt to rationalize disagreement with a candidate. Sorta makes OP's point.

[dchill]

59. "underqualified, an elitist, and a joke." Take that with plenty...

of Kool-Aid, so you don't choke. When put up against Senator Clinton, he is the winner.

[RazBerryBeret]

64. I just love that

the candidate who grew up with a single mom, with food stamps...then with his grandparents is the elitist....kinda reminds me of Kerry's war record....

[Politicalboi]

170. And being a

Black child to a white mother in the 60's. He must have gotten it from both ends.

[Warren DeMontague]

87. Can you please DEFINE what you mean by "elitist"?

Precisely?

[roseBudd]

90. shouldn't you add in your humble opinion, since what you wrote is an 1 opinion, yours & not a fact

[roguevalley]

99. indydem, you are sad.

[cui bono]

111. If you REALLY believe that Obama is an elitist than you are quite naive.

And need to inform yourself beyond the Clinton campaign's talking points.

Sad.

[Usrename]

124. Which president do you think was ever more qualified than he is?

Just curious about what you think the qualifications for president should be.

[Name removed]

161. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[whatchamacallit]

5. Funny, recently I've been wondering how anybody can actually loath Obama

You must be right; it's not the man, it's the obstacle.

[Texas Hill Country]

6. actually, it is his a great many of supporters that repulse me most - same for many many people.

[Webster Green]

23. What language are you using?

WTF?! :wtf:

[dionysus]

36. it seems to be in incorrect translation from hillbot into english...

[Texas Hill Country]

75. you continue your streak of non-issue snarky commentary... way to contribute

[TheWraith]

140. What do you expect when you make fact-free and content-free accusations?

You make a random smear, act like it has basis, and run away. You assert as true things that have no truth. So why are you surprised when you get snarked at?

[yellowcanine]

29. I am curious - how is it that you can speak for "many many people"?

Isn't that just a teeny bit presumptuous on your part? I mean, who actually elected you to speak for them?

[roseBudd]

93. HRC supporters do not repulse me, but their illogical arguments & concern troll trumpeting of

anything negative written or said about Obama in any venue (Fox, NewsMax, Weekly Standard, etc) brings out the childish MoDo type of commentary from my keyboard.

[VotesForWomen]

143. hear, hear; and you have to assume that reflects on the candidate himself. nt

[Eric Condon]

156. Why?

What does that have to do with him?

I will never vote for Clinton, but that has nothing to do with her supporters, and it has everything to do with her pandering, GOP-enabling bullshit.

[ExPatLeftist]

150. Choosing a candidate based on his/her supporters is naive and illogical.

There are assholes everywhere. Some choose to support each candidate. If that even plays into your decision then you are being controlled by idiots rather than focusing on the issues.

Yes, some Obama supporters are jerks, but they do not speak for him. On the other hand, Hillary herself is running a dirty campaign and you excuse that but allow some jerks that HAPPEN to support Obama (but in no way speak for him) to sour you on him. Where is the logic in that? Non existent.

"No way can I vote for Steve because Mary is voting for Steve and she is SUCH a bitch!!!" Your "argument" belongs in a high-school student body election, not in a presidential primary.

[polmaven]

173. I have to agree.

It is more the "rabid" (and, I will add, disgusting)Hillary haters that repulse me, and I will say, most of the Hillary supporters here. I am quite sure that most of the polling would show that the vast majority of HRC supporters on this board will easily be able to support Senator Obama if (we may actually need to say when, at this point) he is the official nominee. I doubt the same is true for Senator Obama's supporters here.

The accusations and outright name calling (fu***add your own ending, Freeper, Republican, troll, and, lately, the most common - racist - to name just a few) all because we support another candidate, are not worthy of Senator Obama, nor of his message of hope and change.

I know there are some HRC people who do her campaign a disservice, but not NEARLY as over the top as the BO supporters. Just this thread alone is an example.

There is barely a thread nowadays in which someone doesn't call HRC and/or her supporters and voters - all of us - racists. I honestly think that Senator Obama would be appalled.

[ecstatic]

7. Obama supporters would have a legitimate reason to be outraged

if Hillary becomes the nominee, because that would mean the superdelegates overturned the will of the people.

HRC supporters cannot claim similar outrage, unless she overtakes Obama in pledged delegates (impossible).

[Texas Hill Country]

11. the people are essentially split... there is no "will of the people"

[Hepburn]

19. Yeah, right....

...that is why Hilly is losing to Obama ~~ the people have not expressed a choice.

Isn't there some point in time when you get dizzy from all the spinning you do?

[HCE SuiGeneris]

49. Christ, you are tiresome.

[Lucky 13]

120. In America, it is possible to win an election by just a single vote.

That's democracy.

"Close" only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes... as my granpappy used to say.

[MonkeyFunk]

38. She could win the popular vote

that's not overturning the will of the people. Also, she's ahead in votes of Democrats, so that's a good criterion for superdelegates to use, too. She won't have "stolen" anything if she wins.

[Hepburn]

40. Ummmmmmm....

...yeah, and pigs could fly.

Your point?

[MonkeyFunk]

47. You call that an argument?

My point is that you guys think the pledged delegate count is the only real reflection of "the will of the people". It's not.

[Hepburn]

55. Bingo...

...you Hillbots think that circumventing the leader to get Hilly the nom is what democracy is all about.

People like you? :puke:

[MonkeyFunk]

86. You don't even try to be rational

or reasonable, do you? Nothing but hateful nonsense.

Would you address the point? Leading in pledged delegates is NOT the only measure of the popular will. There are other measures that are just as valid. Disregarding who leads in which category, would you agree with that?

That getting more votes would be one such measure? Taht getting more votes among democrats would be one such measure?

And ultimately, it's a moot argument because the candidate WILL be selected by superdelegates, and the superdelegates are free to use any criteria they want.

[acetylyne]

160. here is my problem with your argument here

Now, I haven't seen the updated numbers since the primaries last night, but I do know this about Hillary's popular vote argument. The only way she comes out on top in the popular vote is by counting Florida and Michigan votes. This is not a problem for me because, hell, our votes should count for something right? (to clarify: I live in Michigan)

Well if you agree with that, then you have to count ALL of the votes, and since John Edwards is out of the race, the 44% of uncommitted Michigan voters have to be given to Obama, and Hillary doesn't do that in her popular vote totals. In fact, for all of her rhetoric about voter disenfranchisement, she is ignoring the voice of almost half of the Michigan democratic base who said explicitly: Not Hillary.

Even WITHOUT that 44% counted, she only lead by 100,000 votes, and I have a pretty good feeling that the numbers involved in the 14% victory Obama had in NC last night will make short work of that.

[Politicalboi]

172. She is behind in

The popular vote too. And don't count FL and MI because she AGREED that they would not count. But of course now that she is losing she wants them to count. If Obama won them she sure as shit wouldn't even care about FL and MI. And if the SD's choose Obama even though Hillary was ahead in delegates and popular vote like Obama is, that would be fine with you? Yeah Right!

[ihavenobias]

62. If you translated the Caucus States into the popular vote, *Obama* would be even further ahead

In other words, Obama would have won all but one (and possibly all) of the caucus states if they were primary states, making his popular vote lead even bigger than it already is.

[D23MIURG23]

134. Its the one agreed upon by all candidates at the beginning of the contest.

Its also the one requiring no guesswork in caucus states that didn't tabulate the "popular vote". So yes, it is the important one to all those not trying to sneak the loosing candidate in the back door.

Better luck next time.

[roseBudd]

94. Right because the independent vote in GE doesn't elect or defeat a nominee

[Prophet 451]

103. One good arguement and one bad one

Ahead in votes from Democrats is dubious since firstly, AFAIK, many caucuses and primaries didn't track that data and secondly, whoever runs in November is going to need support from those same non-Democratic voters.

OTOH, if she can win the popular vote, that would probably bring her number of delegates within shouting distance of his. If the Clinton campaign can do that (WITHOUT including Michigan since she has pretty much ruled out the only fair option, a re-vote), then a decent arguement could be made.

[ExPatLeftist]

151. Since when is the popular vote the metric to win the primary?

It's not.

You want to change the rules in the middle of the game, but only because that would support your team.

IMO that is pretty despicable.

[VotesForWomen]

144. the current primary process hardly represents 'the will of the people.' please. nt

[ExPatLeftist]

152. But it IS the current process

Like it or not.

You play by the rules. If you do not like them, you push for changes AFTER the game is over which will come into effect in the NEXT game.

There is a word for trying to change the rules in the middle of a game: CHEATING.

That some supporters of Hillary cannot see that trying to change the rules in mid-game sours a lot of people on Hillary is mind boggling. I can guarantee that if Obama was trying to finagle a win by any means possible and talking about how "unfair" the system IN PLACE is, there would be more than a few Clinton supporters up in arms. And rightly so.

[gateley]

8. The examples you cite,

and others of similar nature, are what added to my dis-ease with Hillary. And I agree that Obama didn't engage in those tactics. Different style of campaigning, which I personally feel is an indication of who that candidate, as a person, really IS.

[navarth]

9. well spoken. n/t

[CherylK]

10. K &R!

[Lyric]

14. McClurkin and giving bigots a "voice at the table" is enough to dislike him.

I don't hate him. But I am also 100% convinced that if he's our nominee, McCain will win the general.

I support the candidate who can win the war...not just the battle.

[global1]

31. Sounds To Me You Support The Candidate That Voted For The War......nt

[gateley]

52. Wars plural -- That candidate also gave the Kyl-Lieberman bill her blessing,

and look at what we're facing today.

[BlueStater]

101. Which Obama didn't even fucking vote on n/t

[Hepburn]

57. Win the war???

Are you referring to the IWR that HilLIARy voted for? That war?

[ExPatLeftist]

154. "I am... 100% convinced that if he's our nominee, McCain will win the general."

Fear mongering.

Unsupported.

Anti-democratic.


I remember when people voted based on conviction rather than pessimistic and flawed strategy (with absolutely nothing to back it up).

You keep playing the old jaded politics if you want, I choose to support the person that I think is the best candidate rather than based on some unfounded fear. And despite all the millions of reasons against it, I still believe in Hope - just as I believed in the man from Hope so many years ago.

[NJmaverick]

16. K & R! For the truth!

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. Hate is a funny thing

If you hate me enough, eventually I'll reciprocate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5830451&mesg_id=5830451

[ihavenobias]

30. WHO CARES? Are we voting on who has the best supporters or who is the best candidate?!

It's such an awful, awful argument.

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. The choice is difficult because it's the latter. We have good candidates. n/t

[ExPatLeftist]

155. Dead on.

The two most illogical arguments that some Clinton supporters use ad nauseum:

1) Obama's has mean supporters! (Or, "I am not going to vote for Mary because Steve is voting for Mary and Steve is such a dick!") This "argument" would have been lame and irrational in a high-school election.

2) Obama will lose the GE! Fear mongering. Against the spirit of democracy. Nothing to support it.


Sad to see so many desperate people clinging to such ridiculous non-logic.

[emilyg]

135. I missed that. Thank you.

Says a lot.

[uponit7771]

18. I have the feeling that a good portion of these people are freepers

[Hepburn]

24. I would say that at a minimum, the Hilly supporters represent the far...

...RW of the Dem Party, if Democrats at all.

[Mags]

61. see how arrogant you BO folk are, because we won't vote for him

you question if we are Democrats. Then you want our votes. What a joke.

[Divernan]

132. The joke's on you, Mags - cause you got tombstoned!!! LOL

[MyNameGoesHere]

20. Silly you, it's not Obama it's his supporters. Obama has been

a very good and honest man, the supporters not so much.

[ihavenobias]

35. Again, WHO CARES? Are we voting on who has the best supporters or who is the best candidate?!

Listen to what you're saying, it's outrageous.

And look, I'm fair about this. I also can't respect the idea that someone would vote for Obama simply because he/she dislikes the average Clinton supporter. That's the wrong reason for ANYONE to vote or not vote for someone.

[MyNameGoesHere]

45. Oh damn you done went drunk on

hope, unity, and change and totally missed my point. Who cares what i base it on? It is still America right? And i never asked for your little smattering of respect. I got all i want. Thanks anyway.

[ihavenobias]

63. Wow. That may well have been the worst possible response to a post I've seen

It's embarrassing.

Yes, I realize you're free to vote for someone based on anything you like, including who you think has nicer eyes or a better haircut, but don't act like it's a good thing and that you're *proud* to vote for objectively stupid reasons.

A rational person can look at the issues and decide they prefer Hillary (even though I disagree completely). But only an irrational person would vote for or against someone largely or solely because of their supporters.

[MyNameGoesHere]

105. Well the way i act is not a concern of yours. Just be proud to know

my wasted vote counts as much as yours. so nyanya nya

[rucky]

114. It's a really good reason to loathe the Pittsburgh Steelers, though.

GO BROWNS!

[Lucky 13]

121. How many Superbowl titles do your Browns have?

just asking.

[rucky]

122. Case in point.

And for the record, I'd like to say that this is the Browns year, and I'm sticking with my statement at least until the opening game.

[Lucky 13]

123. I'm just razzin you. I'm a Skins fan. But have a new 2nd favorite in the Steelers!

[Vote4Change]

185. Count Me In!

Go Browns & Go Obama! What a winning ticket!

As for all the longing-for-naught Hillary backers. Sorry, but with the irrefutable support of harmonizing background mathematicians*, I believe I hear the fat lady singing.

*Math is only "fuzzy" for those who don't understand it.

[Erin Elizabeth]

21. Yep!

For months and months now, I've gotten the distinct sense (and some Hillary supporters have even said it outright) that the resentment is ALL about the fact that they feel and Hillary feels that it's HER TURN and godDAMN anyone who gets in her fucking way!

Like it's a coronation. She's EARNED it. See the bloody nail holes in her hands? How can you deny such a martyr, and a martyr with a VAGINA, NO LESS, her place in history? HOW HOW HOW????

:crazy:

[vi5]

22. And there's the disconnect I think....

Look, Hillary supporters are irritated and hate the tone and nature of Obama supporters and are CONVINCED beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Obama supporters have been meaner, nastier, and more down and dirty.

Obama supporters are irritated and hate the tone and nature of Clinton supporters and are CONVINCED beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Clinton supporters have been meaner, nastier, and more down and dirty.

Let's assume that this is a tomato/tomahto thing and nothing is going to change either side's mind.

The fact is that the examples you cited give Obama supporters plenty or reasons to also dislike Clinton the candidate in addition to the requisite hatred of her supporters. These are concrete examples of one of the candidates acting like a republican and using and/or playing into republican style fear tactics.

When Clinton supporters are pressed to cite similar behavior from Obama it's always these sputtering, vague answers that don't actually cite specific examples or things said or done by Obama.

[DMorgan]

27. Brilliant post

Wish I could find a Hillary supporter thread that's as well conceived.

[DemGa]

28. Obama ran initially on Hillary's right-wing generated "negatives"

--defining Hillary as therefore damaged - "polarizing" and "divisive" due to their effects. Aligning with the effects of the right-wing attacks - a clear act of treachery.

From there, the Obama campaign quickly moved into constant assaults on Hillary's character i.e., Hillary is dishonest, "calculating," will "do or say anything." This has been a mainstay of the Obama campaign.

Of course, this is all done in a veiled way - "hope and change" - stunning hypocrisy.

And hence, Obama the charlatan. No, I don't hate Obama - I do see easily through his weakness - and the charade.

[global1]

48. It's No Secret That Hillary Has Negatives - The Clinton's In General Have......

negatives. She was half beat before she started because of the negatives. If the Obama campaign ran initially on those negatives - they ran on facts.

Since then Hillary has shown her character - her dishonesty (Bosnia, NAFTA) her calculating do or say anything (gas tax holiday, obliterate Iran, take on OPEC).

Veiled way 'hope and change' - stunning hypocrisy? I think not. Hope and change is all we have left - and if Obama can give us the hope for change in this country - then I'm for him.

[DemGa]

65. The right-wing attacks found their origins in many falsehoods

-- this is undeniable. Obama aligned with the effects of those attacks - again, indisputable.

This is using the weapons of the enemy against a fellow Dem - you may call it just stating "facts"; but by your own measure, Obama is therefore justifiably damaged by any right-wing attacks he may endure. This is on its face, nonsensical - as you must then counter your own logic to remain consistent.

Now, as for the assaults on Hillary's character: repeatedly and broadly defining someone as dishonest is the very lowest and most vile of campaign tactics (and exactly what Team Obama has done) - character assassination. It could just as easily be proven that Obama is an egregious liar - were that narrative to be pushed. The very same tactic was used on Al Gore in 2000 - and again, a Democrat (Bill Bradley) led that charge.

[ihavenobias]

66. You are being *incredibly* vague

My original post contains several specific examples. By contrast you offer broad, vague ideas that are hard to pin down and are incredibly subjective.

You're reading into it in a way that suits you. While that applies to me to an extent, it's clearly not the same extent if for no other reason than my ability to be specific.

[DemGa]

70. But your "specific" examples are loaded with subjective qualities

"Did Obama have an "as far as I know" moment?"

This is pure supposition to find nefarious intent, especially given the full context. For one, Hillary denied Obama was a Muslim; and secondly, if Hillary countered too strongly, it could suggest a view that something was inherently wrong with being a Muslim.

There's simply nothing damning in her statement without making a stretch in negative assumption about intent - purely subjective.

[ihavenobias]

72. Funny

I conceded there was an element of subjectivity to my post, but added that I was far less subjective than you.

Great, so you found the *one* example that we can have a reasonable disagreement about. Congratulations. It doesn't change the rest of my examples nor does it help that you have *no* specific examples.

[Politicalboi]

174. Even a child

Could see that Clinton lied about Bosnia and we have video of the FACTS. Do you mean to tell me if Obama said he was in the South Side of Chicago and had to run to flee snipers and it was found out to be a lie Hillary wouldn't touch on that? Obama could have taken her over the cliff with that if he wanted too. But he let the media and you tube do it. And besides it was a lie. She not only said it once she said it 3 times. And then lied about why she lied. She did it all herself. Why do you think people here on DU who fully supported her for years and mostly said nice things about her and Bill would turn their back on her? Do you think just one person changed or thousands here at DU? In the year 2000 we could have all dreamed of a Hillary nomination.

[Eric Condon]

157. The Obama camp didn't have to paint her as dishonest - she did that herself.

Obama didn't force her to lie about Bosnia.

[fascisthunter]

32. Thank You... Nominated

Do you suppose the fanatics pushing Hillary will ever concede?

[Zodiak]

34. I hear this from the Hillary supporters

They do not like his speech cadence...reminds them of a preacher.

I sometimes hear it, too, but I do not have a knee-jerk revulsion to religion, so it is far from a deal-breaker for me. In fact, I like that people can follow such a cadence because Kerry was hard to follow (as smart as he is) and I think he lost a lot of people.

[high density]

44. To be honest I didn't like his speech cadence at the beginning either

I thought he sounded like a high school football coaching giving a speech in a locker room or something. Whether or not that's a reason to "hate" or be "disgusted" by him, I don't know.

For whatever reason, the more I listened to him give speeches, the less of a problem it was for me. Now it doesn't bother me at all, and I am fully behind him.

[MonkeyFunk]

39. I see very few posts

indicating hatred of Obama by Clinton supporters. For every one, there are at least 30 posts from Obama supports hating Clinton.

No, you guys have cornered the market on hate.

[paulk]

54. they've also cornered the market on strawmen

[ihavenobias]

60. But we have *reasons* to be disgusted by Hillary's campaign, that was the whole point of my post

Read the original post again. There simply is no comparison between the two campaigns.

I do see that one Clinton supporter wrote an incredibly vague, conspiracy theory like post about how Obama hides his terrible tactics behind hope and change but it's laughable and not specific.

[MonkeyFunk]

89. Yes, there is valid comparisons between the two campaigns

I don't think Obama's been any cleaner than Clinton. But overall, I think it's been a rather gentle primary - those of you who think this is a very notably ugly campaign are too sensitive for politics.

You think there's reason to hate Clinton because you believe every attack against her, and you excuse everything Obama does.

[ihavenobias]

95. You have to be specific or it's pointless

Generically saying that you think Obama's campaign has been the same is baseless statement unless you provide some evidence.

We're waiting.

[MonkeyFunk]

96. But that's not what this thread is about

Anything I say, you'll dismiss. I'm talking about the general proposition that how you view the campaigns generally depends on whom you support.

You guys take everything every Clinton supporter says or does and puts it in the worst light, then assign blame to clinton herself. Then you take every complaint about Obama's campaign and dismiss it as either meaningless, or not Obama's fault. That's how you end up with such a skewed view of things.

For instance, many here blamed Clinton personally for the robocalls in NC, but dismissed any criticism of the faked video of Mickey Kantor. If you think about it, they're similar situations - there's no link between the candidates and those items. But Clinton got pilloried here, and Obama was absolved. That's just silly.

[ihavenobias]

98. You're copping out now

I'm just asking you to be specific in countering my bullet points in my original post.

I haven't read about or posted anything in any robo-call threads. It's ironic you bring up the fact that we shouldn't attack Hillary for what her supporters may do considering what people have done to Obama over Rev. Wright, the Weather Underground guy, etc.

I agree. But I'm sure Hillary approved the 3am ads, and it was Hillary herself that praised McCain (over Obama) and went on O'Reilly's show and answered the Wright question the way she did. That has nothing to do with her supporters and everything to do with her and her campaign.

[pkz]

53. Hate is too strong a word~

Resentment is more appropriate.

I am in WV, have made 135 connected calls in a very heavy retired area of our county.

To a one, the 58-72 age group of women feel resentment, they make comments like "a woman should be President before a _ _ _ _ _ man"

The sense of entitlement and yes, racism disgust me.

Oddly, and thankfully, the women 18-55, 75-85, and men of 40+ ARE pro-O

[Cant trust em]

58. Don't forget the race baiting

Someone might have already mentioned that one.

[Freedom Train]

67. Disgusted by Obama?

Who has even suggested being that? It's the Obama supporters we're disgusted with, with good reason I might add. If I feel anything at all about Obama it's indifference - along with a sense that he's not a viable candidate if we want to win the GE. But I don't even dislike him, so quit your bullshit.

[ihavenobias]

68. Oh please

There have been many, many posts (and callers into various radio shows and emails read on cable news shows, etc.) that reflect the idea that many Hillary supporters ARE disgusted with Obama and or that they resent and can't stand him.

Trying to pretend otherwise is showing blatant dishonesty. That or you aren't paying attention, you choose. ;)

[Freedom Train]

79. Then I haven't been paying attention

Because I haven't seen or heard any Obama hate. Hillary hate on the other hand...

[ihavenobias]

83. Yes, there are some people who have bashed Hillary on non-substantive issues, I totally agree

The MSM especially at one point was ridiculous with their talking about her laugh, how she dressed, if she showed too much cleavage and on and on with pointless issues.

I'm not a fan of bashing EITHER candidate over non-substantive issues. Which reminds me, I even think the sniper-gate thing was overblown.

[cornermouse]

69. Since I frequently use the phrase "as far as I know" and mean

exactly and precisely that I don't know about that particular subject, I'm going to assume that I don't qualify for forgiveness or absolution or whatever it is you think you're peddling over there in fantasyland.

Rightful ascension? Give me a break.

[ihavenobias]

76. It's funny that you and another poster only managed to take issue with ONE of my many examples

It shows I did a decent job.

Let me know if you can find similar issues with the other examples I listed and we'll have a conversation. Until then we'll just have a reasonable disagreement on the "as far as I know".

[cornermouse]

78. As far as I know and as far as I have seen on this board,

there's no real point in talking to you. You're entrenched in your anti-Hillary bias. And after the abuse I've had hurled at me for not agreeing Obama is just the peachiest, kewlest, bestest person in the whole wide world, I've feeling quite stubborn.

[ihavenobias]

81. How about this

I did NOT used to feel this way about Hillary. She *earned* it.

Yes, she was never my first or second choice, but I didn't actively dislike her this strongly. And really I'm sure she's a fine person, it's just her campaign tactics and some of her framing on issues I can't stand.

She's intelligent and competent. She WOULD be better than McCain, there's no question in my mind about that. I disagree with Obama supporters who say they'd be the same, and even more laughably that Obama would be identical to McCain.

At any rate, we can have a reasonable disagreement about why we prefer one candidate over another. If you think I'm that insanely biased, so be it, I think what I just wrote above shows otherwise.

[cornermouse]

85. Okay. reciprocation.

Obama could make a decent president. The real problem is that I am and always have been worried about his lack of voting record on sensitive issues. When you get older, you realize words are easy to say and promises are easy to make without any intention of every carrying through on them. That's why, in a way, his ability to make speeches worries me. With the exception of Dubya, most liars are good speakers.

I still basically consider myself an Edwards supporter and am usually reluctant to change loyalty but have reluctantly considered my alternatives. Hillary is my choice.

The bottom line is that you can't go around bashing and trashing people and then say "It's over, let's all be friends" after some of the things that have been said here. Using nonsensical in your title is ridiculing and belittling. You went downhill after that. There are some unsettling similarities between what abused spouses have to go through and what's been going on in GD-P. You might want to think about that.

[ihavenobias]

92. I agree that

my post was not conciliatory in tone. It was inflammatory, I readily admit and am aware of that. It was really more of a rant and an expression of frustration over what I view to be an absurd position, again for the reasons I listed.

With that said, my points were substantive, and not based on bullshit non-issues (Hillary's laugh, where she does shots and so on).

I too was an Edwards supporter initially. I agreed with him when he said that only he and Obama were candidates for change out of the three (although they had different ideas on how to create that change) and that Hillary was the status quo, especially in light of her donors, i.e. most money of all candidates from defense and health care industries, etc.

As for comparisons to abused spouses, I think it's insulting to people in that actual situation to make such a comparison.

And no one said we all have to be friends in the end, we just don't have to be enemies that vote for McCain (no matter what happens).

[cornermouse]

100. Echoes around DU.

You're stupid.

You're crazy.

You can't do anything right.

The shoe fits.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

71. Who hates Obama? He's just a politician ... just not my choice

to take the helm at this extremely critical time.


The only disgust, or revulsion, I feel is toward some of his hate-filled supporters.

[Window]

73. Good rant! Feels good to get that off your back, I bet. LOL!

:kick:

[Bullet1987]

74. Clinton supporters need to justify their resentment by making shit up

It's as simple as that. Otherwise, they would have to accept that Obama has been piled-on for weeks now...and they don't want to sympathize for him. And yes, there are a number of Clinton supporters who feel she's entitled and has "payed her dues." They'll never say that on here though, but it's what they're thinking to themselves. They view Obama much like Clinton does, a nuisance.

[jgraz]

77. Another great post -- K&R

Many people are realizing the emptiness of Hillary's campaign. This is just more evidence.

[Beausoir]

80. Did Obama hire the ex-gay clown McClurkin to pander to his bigot base? Yep.

I don't hate anyone. But I sure find Obama disgusting.

[ForeignSpectator]

82. K&R n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

84. Racism and trolling by a large faction of Republican infiltrators, Reagan Dems, & useful idiots

Manipulated by a Republican information war infiltration tactic set up
thru the DLC and racist, class warfare based "liberal" front groups for
business coalitions, designed to destroy the Democratic party from within.

[roseBudd]

88. Well... some say he looks down his nose... how dare he be over 6 ft tall! The nerve.

[OhioChick]

91. Damn Good Post!

K&R
:kick:

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

104. I hope McCain LOSES

and loses big. We must think of our party first, our candidate second.

[VotesForWomen]

106. this post is proof positive that the O campaign is a cult. you see what you want to see. nt

[ihavenobias]

108. That statement is laughable (and does nothing to refute the bullet points in the OP)

No really, I laughed when I read it.

You know, that maniacal, cult-like laughter. ;)

[VotesForWomen]

146. well, it's not possible to 'refute,' anymore than i could refute the 6-day creation to an ardent fun

fundamentalist. objective reality just doesn't matter to them. they are determined to maintain the faith.

[cui bono]

113. Your name is proof positive that you don't think for yourself and inform yourself about your choices

[ihavenobias]

115. Self delete

[cui bono]

116. My reply was to "VoteForWomen".

:) :hi:

[ihavenobias]

117. I know, hence the self delete :)

[cui bono]

118. =)

[VotesForWomen]

145. i suggest you consult some history books before you make assumptions about my user name. then you c

can apologize.

[CherylK]

109. Bump!

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ihavenobias]

119. To be fair

I wouldn't say she deserves 99.9% of the criticism. If you're referring to GOP style campaign tactics, yes.

But she was initially and unfairly badgered on non-substantive issues (by the MSM) like her laugh, etc. Of course Obama had nothing to do with that and didn't try to add on to it.

[shagsak]

176. You call them Hillbots, and wonder why they despise Obama supporters

But hey, at least you capitalized it.

[BzaDem]

125. This is great.

First, it's "we're right, and you're wrong." Then, it's "you have no basis on which not to agree with us, no basis for outrage." Then, it's "there is no theoretical way that anyone could possible disagree with us."

Yay mob rule, Yay absolute stupidity, Boo conversation and disagreement.

[Raine]

126. TOTALLY Agree...EXACTLY on point! nt

[ihavenobias]

128. Thanks n/t

[OhioChick]

127. Evening Kick!

:kick:

[Lebam in LA]

129. I have never hated Obama

nor been disgusted by him. He is a good man. I thought Hillary was the better candidate because she is hard and tenacious. The majority disagrees with me so it is time she steps down and puts her full support and resources toward getting the nominee elected. She can make a huge contribution in the senate. We need to get behind our nominee, Barack!!!

[ihavenobias]

130. A reasonable post n/t

[AZBlue]

133. I wondered something similar on another thread.

I just don't understand how someone can dislike him. OK, maybe for some reason you still support Clinton (which I don't get either, but it's a free country) but why on earth would anyone hate Obama?!?!?!?!

[Voltaire99]

136. 360 words and you don't mention racism?

Surely you don't imagine Hillary backers aren't racists.

The roughly half in Indiana exit polls today who said they'd jump to McCain if Obama's nominated aren't kidding. They don't plan to sidle up to McCain because he's so cuddly, you know.

The unspoken animus against Obama from HRC's backers isn't mysterious -- nor is it curable.

[WinkyDink]

138. If her supporters are racists, why would you WANT their vote, hmmmm?

[Jamastiene]

137. Reagan worship, liberal bashing, McClurkin and other antigay elements of Obama's campaign,

bashing people's First Amendment rights, snobbishness, sexism....the list goes on and on.

Nah, THOSE REASONS wouldn't have anything at all to do with it, now would they?

Give me a fucking break, already. I could get all those elements of a campaign from a fucking Republican, but I'm not a Republican. I'm a Democrat. I expect any Democratic candidate to at least have some values in common with the party, unlike Obama, who is merely a Republican plant with Republican values. That's ok, though. You'll see the error of your choices when he's a one termer who DOES NOTHING to CHANGE this country back to any semblance of HOPE or freedom and equality for all. You will see. I will be sure to say "I told you so" as many times as it takes when the time comes...in 2016.

[TheWraith]

139. Kick.

"Error: You've already recommended this thread."

[democracy1st]

142. K & R

[quickesst]

147. Wrong title....

Clinton supporters do not hate Obama, but they are disgusted by the level of hatred Obama supporters show HRC, and her supporters. We also know the offers to "bury the hatchet", will only be made to garner votes for their candidate. In select company, hearts, and minds, these same people will still harbor the hatred thay have thus far displayed in this primary. The one thing O supporters cannot see, is the obvious. Thanks.
quickesst

[shagsak]

181. garner votes for their candidate?

Try garner votes for the Democratic Party. I've said countless times ,and I'm not alone, that whoever wins the nomination will get my vote. I'm not cutting off my nose to spite my face regardless of how much I disapprove of the other democratic candidate. Most of us O supporters want everyone to rally together now that things are looking more clear. And you know if the shoe was on the other foot, you would try to rally the party together around your candidate in the end to beat the real challenger.

I just hope it isn't too late for us to all be Democrats again and not a split party. After reading through this thread, it's obvious how divided we are.

[Duppers]

148. I support Obama but

Michelle needs to apologize for this....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN1qZMBE9Gc&feature=related

This was taking the low road and Barrack himself would not have done this. Michelle needs to cap it.

[JCMach1]

153. You only need to know that he's better than McCain

That should be enough...

[Rene]

158. www.attacktimeline.com.....see who's really run a divisive campaign - OBAMA

[Rene]

159. 4 years of an obama will be chaos. he never makes a decision-120 PRESENT votes

bho will lead this country into an abyss of confusion.

[dollydew]

162. Hillary supporter here

I tried the argument, for months, that we need a Democrat in the WH. I said repeatedly, sure, I'd like Hillary to win but would vote for the Democrat no matter what. No matter how reasonable I was I was called names and accused of racism. Being non-white, I first found this amusing. Then it just pissed me off. I''m part of a known demographic that actually tends to vote. Telling Hillary supporters their votes aren't needed ensures a loss of millions of Democratic voters. Eight more years of Bush doctrine. Eight more years of dead innocents. I'm not angry any more. I'm just sad.

[10SMatch]

163. Hate/Disgusted?

I had stopped "visiting" because of posts exactly
like this but just popped into today and see things have not
changed. We still are subject to the same screeds. Where are
the Congrats Hillary! for Ind! and likewise Congrats Obama!
for NC! That is UNITY! Your post is filled with rightwing
rhetoric and written not by a Democrat but someone I am not
familiar with - but that's the "new" Democratic
Party.   

Instead we get Hillary entitlement posts - she attacked Obama
from the right on the 3am ad - that she said McCain was
"more qualified" which she NEVER did - only that he
had experience (the village idiot can figure out he has
senority). Who cares which "shows" they went on or
even listen to the screeds of the right? Much better to turn
it all off and not listen even to the lefties from whose
mouths cam irresponsible sexist and vulgar language. There
isn't even a clue that anyone knows what the "kitchen
sink" was about - it was an anonymous aide in the NYTimes
citing her strategy to concentrate on five specific policies
that she and Obama disagreed on! And then the gold medal of
them all, if Obama doesn't win in November, it's all because
of Hillary. 

He'll lose because of Hillary impuning his "pure"
character - LOL - not because he is going to get savaged in
the South in states that haven't voted Democratic since
Johnson, and the red states will turn blue (It's a MIRACLE!)
that he carries with him baggage that will make Wright look
like a romp in the park, that he has absolutely no connection
with the "rust belt" voters, that he shot himself in
the foot repeatedly and will continue to do so because he is a
rookie making rookies mistakes and he and his supporters have
done anything and everything to ensure his winning even if it
were at the expense of Hillary and her supporters. He lied and
continues to lie about his health care being universal, he
will put "social security back on the table," have
you looked at his scheme with Ayer's fingerprints all over it
to privatize the schools? What is he proposing for seniors? A
little help with heating bills and they should volunteer.
College costs? No problem, a little indentured servitude is
called for. Why not go beyond the identity politics, even if
it is just once, and look at his thin resume or would that be
expecting too much.  

Despite his deciding that anyone who won't vote for him is
racist, it boils right down to his lack of Democratic Party
policy. Since I am a white, "old" female, I have
received more nasty insults than I ever would have believed
possible - from what I thought was my own party. I am told I
am not wanted there anymore, because there is a
"new" kind of politics - one that is about
"change", and that apparently means confronting what
is wrong with - Democrats! 

There is a SPLIT and it's hardly accidental. It’s a third
party candidate taking over an existing party rather than
starting up one from scratch. The LIbertarians couldn't make
it in the Republcian Party, they knew better, so now they are
after the Democratic Party. It isn’t about race or gender.
It’s about the fact that the party has decided to throw out
everyone that Libertarians don’t like with Lord Kos, Huffinton
and the rest jumping on the band wagon - Brazile said it last
nite - throw the baby out with the bathwater.  What is really
splitting the party is that Barack Obama keeps praising
Republican ideas, leaders, and policies, while insulting and
tearing down Democratic leaders, ideas, and policy. That's why
I won't vote for Obama and that's why many I know won't. 

And with all the name calling, slurs and misogynistic comments
- not only from the candidate but from his surrogates and his
supporters, he has not earned my support. You may indeed get
exactly what you wished for but what you will get is a
politician who uses nothing new - and it was his choice. But
he uses whomever and whatever to get what he wants and make no
mistake that's how he got where he is.  

For once, stand up and take responsibility for the missteps
and the mishits instead of blaming it on Mrs. Satan and her
husband who have done more to build the Democratic Party than
most who are now in power in the DNC making the rules so the
GoldenBoy can swoop to the nomination - people like Brazile
and Dean - they certainly should be proud of their winning
record! And their manipulation of the rules to enable Obama.  

Just be thankful that McCain is so weak and the people,
Republicans included, are sick of the wars and occupation.
That's the only shot Obama has. In IND, Hillary won among men
and among women, in northern, central and southern parts of
the state, among those who earn more than $50,000 per year and
those who earn less, union voters and non-union voters,
suburban and rural voters, churchgoers, gun-owners, and those
who have not graduated from college.

Hillary also won among those who say the economy is the most
important issue, those who are affected by the recession,
those who say health care is most important, electability and
experience voters. Hillary also led Obama on
commander-in-chief.

That's his HOPE. Because he won't have my vote. And one look
at the EC map and a sharp pencil will show his battle has
hardly begun. We'll see how well his Alinsky protocols, his
rightwing aides from the Cato Institute and his Friedman
economic team along with the Corrupt Chicago political machine
plays out ... but it's going to be hard for him to attack
McCain from the right which he consistently done with Hillary.


There is no hate - but there is distrust because he lies. You
excluded us - calling us every name in the book and then some
- and now you want to make nice when you need us! 

So take your donor class, your voting blocs and Good Luck!
There will be a very large X next to every single Democrat on
the slate in November, but the Presidency will be left blank
as the only way a Democratic Platfrom will be enacted during
his reign, is if it comes from the floor. He owes many
apoloties - but the biggest apology goes to Hillary for the
calling her and her family racists. He wouldn't recognize
UNITY if it hit him in the nose - until he needs to use it!  

[ihavenobias]

186. The word "nonsensical" applies once again

Thanks for commenting ;)

[Evergreen Emerald]

164. I will not support a candidate who used race to win. When he shouted "Racism!"

that was it for me. That was worse than Willie Horton. Before that I was comfortable with either, although I felt that he was not experienced enough and did not have the depth of knowledge to be President.

I will not support someone who used race the way he did.

[DrFunkenstein]

165. Worse Than Willie Horton? You Should Think About Your Own Stance With Race.

Remember what the actual Willie Horton ad was implying about Dukakis being ok with allowing murderers leave prison and kill children. Then compare that being disappointed with Bill Clinton comparing Obama's win in South Carolina to Jesse Jackson. Not really the same thing. Maybe if Obama had suggested that Hillary would allow your children to die in their sleep at 3 am, maybe that would come close to the Willie Horton level.

[Evergreen Emerald]

167. Again you minimize what Obama did.

The shouts of "Racism" were before the Jesse Jackson statement. The shouts of "Racism!" were made up out of whole cloth to gather the remaining black voters who supported Clinton. The shouts of "Racism!" were used to quell any criticism of Obama as "Racist!"

Lots of political stunts occurred on both sides. But this went to far. 3AM--typical political ad. Obama's lying flyer about health care--typical political ad. Dividing the Democratic party using race to win at all costs: too far.

"you should think about your won stance with race." And there you go, calling me a "Racist!." YOu Obama supporters cannot have a legitimate discussion without resorting to shouts of "Racism!" GFY.

[Indydem]

171. When talking about Obama's flaws, racism falls under the same paradigm as Godwin's law n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

175. Are you sure that it was Obama injecting race...

...or perhaps some of his supporters and then the media picking up on that?

You need to be very certain and provide specific incidences of Obama *himself* playing the race card. Otherwise, you're just projecting.

Please remember that no matter how many times Hillary Clinton, her surrogates (Ferraro, Johnson, Rendell), and her supporters lie, the Clintons enjoyed nearly 80% support from the black community. Because of the Clintons' subtle form of racism and clandestine attempts to turn Obama into "The Black Candidate," they alienated most black people who defected to Obama.

I still have never seen any SPECIFIC cases where Obama HIMSELF used the race card. And I also want to know SPECIFIC instances where his surrogates EXPLICITLY injected race into the discourse.

[urgk]

168. So, it was Obama who first brought up race?

Not Bill Clinton?

I'd like to see the timeline that proves that.

[Evergreen Emerald]

187. Yes it was. When Clinton was saying that Obama was creating a fairy tale

about his stance on the war, Obama's plan was put into action.

[jettison]

182. Yes, except...

Obama never shouted "racism!" If he did, then please quote him with sources.

[Sundoggy]

169. This logic separates

those who are in denial from those who are not in ddenial.

Excellent, excellent post. I have been completely dismayed at the vitriol aimed at Obama, and I say that as a middle aged white Texan, for Heaven's sake. Can't y'all be a little civil?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

178. Hillary, her supportors, and Revisionist History!

Hill and her supporters continue to gush about how Obama is unelectable. But here it is, she had all of the advantages when this primary began:

1. She was a First Lady married to a very popular president.

2. She is a senator from a large state.

3. She was the presumed nominee from the beginning, with the media already touting her as if she had the nomination locked up.

4. She had at least a two year start on Obama because she was equipped with ties to the Democratic Establishment.

5. She had invaluable resources at her disposal, with close ties to Terry McAuliffe, once the head of the DNC who was able to set up primary rules that would favor candidates with name recognition, experience and money.

6. Speaking of money, she started out with a war chest full of money and resources, AND...

7. She had the majority of pledged and superdelegates who were behind her the day she announced for office.

8. Sure, she weathered a media storm, but as a result, many people were sympathetic because they had been through the Right Wing Slime Machine during the Clinton years. That should have helped her.

9. Finally, no matter how many times Hillary and her supporters argue the contrary, Hillary and Bill Clinton enjoyed the support of nearly 80% of the black electorate in the beginning of this campaign season.

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON HAD ALL OF THE ADVANTAGES AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN WINNING THIS NOMINATION HANDS DOWN!!!

Added to all of the Clinton advantages, here is this political upstart, this neophyte politician, Barack Obama, who was a virtual unknown except for a speech he gave at the 2004 Democratic Convention. This neophyte build a grassroots organization from the bottom up and attempted to run a race-neutral campaign, generating support from both progressive and working-class whites in Iowa and other places.

Rather than being blessed with all the "elitist" advantages that the Clintons enjoyed, this man had to build a winning coalition. That coalition consisted of a healthy population of blacks, whites, and people from all religions, creeds and walks of life...that is, until the Clintons turned him into "The Black Candidate" and he made his own mistakes with Rev. Wright and the "bitter" gaffe.

Regardless of these shortcomings, he is the winner! And under no remaining scenario will that change.

And yet, the media, the Clintons, their powerful surrogates, Clinton supporters and the Republicans want to convince us that somehow, the winner and presumed nominee is unelectable?!?!?!

[Neshanic]

179. I wanted to have a Democrat in the WH, simple request.

[BlooInBloo]

180. They're just making up reasons, to provide cover.

[Beacool]

183. I for one don't "hate" anyone.

On the other hand, I don't like Obama and I think that he's too inexperienced to be president. He more likely than not will be the nominee and that's that. Does that also mean that every Democrat will automatically run to support him? I doubt it......

[thesquanderer]

184. Other possible reasons

Yeah, many Hillary supporters seem to be really negative on Obama, despite the fact that he hasn't been nearly as tough on her as she has on him.

re: "It seems to me that Clinton supporters who can't stand Obama only feel that way because... they resent him for standing in the way of their original candidate... AND they have bought into her...talking points"

Yup, those are some possible reasons, but I've also considered some other reasons Hillary voters might refuse to support Obama... Rather than repeat them here, here's the link to my post about this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5866040