Saturday, January 20, 2007

Some more on my Hillary views

I need to disclose some things.

In case it was not clear in the last post, I dislike Hillary Clinton.

I think she has overall done a good job in the Senate, but there is no way I want her to be President. Aside from what I have already written, there are some practical reasons for my strong feelings. If Hillary gets elected, that would mean that for at least 24 years, our Presidents would have been named Bush or Clinton. I don't like that. Moreover, it presents a chance for all the negative, personal political bullshit to continue. There is no question that the Republicans started all of that, beginning with Lee Atwater and then with Newt Gingrich, Ken Starr, and the utter bullshit of the witch hunt against Clinton. However, blame is in some ways irrelevant now. What is relevant is that a Hillary Presidency would present a chance for this pattern to continue and drag down the business of running the country, especially if the GOP could regain control of either part of Congress.

I also need to disclose (again) that I was a strong supporter of Wes Clark in the '04 campaign, and if he decides to run in '08, I will once again be a strong supporter.

And that presents a large potential dilemma for me. If Clark does not run and throws his support behind Hillary (or becomes her running mate), I will be highly vexed. I have not been following things over at Clark's website, so I have no idea what his plans might be, but I think I will start looking into that.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Ray said...

So, you are suggesting that prior to Lee Atwater, all politics was like a Sunday School picnic?

1/20/2007 2:55 PM  
Blogger WCharles said...

No, but Atwater is the one who made personal attack politics--as opposed to substance--the cornerstone of GOP tactics.

1/20/2007 3:10 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

Actually, jobs a big concern in upstate NY and Hillary has worked hard on trying to bring new jobs into the area.... as hard as any politician has, I suppose. She at least likes to take credit and has been seen on the dais beaming at Lockheed Martin when it was announced they would be building the president's helicopter bringing billions to the local economy.

But, though she appears to be fighting for us, there is still a wall called trust that she has not broken down.

1/20/2007 5:28 PM  
Anonymous Ray said...

Here's some opinions from my area.

http://pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/NEWS01/701210335/1001

1/21/2007 7:37 AM  
Blogger WCharles said...

Time for a bit of rambling...

Thanks for the link. Just imagine those kinds of discussions multiplied by a magnitude of at least a thousand.

The comment that really struck me was the one by the person who said that if Hillary had made this announcement in October, he would not have voted for her in November. People do not like feeling like they have been deceived, and I think the electorate today especially feels that way.

One of the things that concerns me is that many people could use the gender issue like Bush has used terrorism. Bush says either you agree with him or you are for the terrorists. Hillary supporters could start saying that if you are not for Hillary you are sexist and misogynistic. Look, I'd be happy to have a woman as President. Just not Hillary.

And there are going to other "issues" that could be used as blunt instruments (as in not even subtle or substantive enough to be "wedge" issues). For instance, if you don't vote for Hillary, you are continuing the insane Clinton obsession. Now that would be true in many instances, but what does it have to do with anything of substance? What does it have to do with the question of whether Hillary would make a good President? Nothing, that's what.

Look, I am definitely on record here as blasting the insane Clinton obsession. And as much as I dislike Hillary, I think she deserves a large measure of justice against the "vast right-wing conspiracy" (and I am being totally sincere about that). But that is no reason to vote for her as President.

As I have mentioned before, I campaigned heavily for Wes Clark in the '04 campaign, and one thing I learned was that sometimes the rank and file of a campaign are not always capable of being controlled by the candidate. I saw it in the Dean campaign and then in the Kerry campaign. During the early parts of the campaign, many Dean supporters were very combative and rude. They really turned off a lot of people, and that is one reason (there were others, for sure) why when things turned just a little, Dean found absolutely no sympathy or allies. After it became apparent that Kerry was going to get the nomination, the people in his campaign became absolutely arrogant, condescending assholes.

My point is that even if Hillary's campaign does not officially endorse or use issues in the manner I have described, her supporters likely will, and that increases the chances of the campaign turning into nothing but a mud-fest.

1/21/2007 2:12 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home