• comment on a post Racism Easier To Overcome Than Sexism over 6 years ago

    I have got a feeling that more black women would say that the greatest 'disadvantage' is being black rather than being a woman.

    (of course I can't prove that a majority of black women would say that, and even if they did it does not necessarily mean  it is true)

  • comment on a post If Colombia Can Fire Penn... over 6 years ago

    Lack of judgement or not she should fire him.

    He is not working full time on the campaign even though Senator Clinton is not in the lead. Taking into account the millions of dollars the Clinton campaign has paid Mark Penn's company he is not even a hard working 'volunteer'.

  • comment on a post What you look for over 6 years ago

    I have no idea what the ratio is between the policy, class, gender, generation and race factors in votes for the Democratic candidates, but  I reckon it would be self-deceiving to believe that race was insignificant.

    As for racism, never supporting a candidate of a different race, setting aside young first time voters, I would not be a surprised if a higher proportion of Senator Obama's black supporters have previously supported  a white candidate than Senator Clinton's white supporters have ever supported a black candidate.

  • OK, as I believe regina1983 post deserved to be rescued from the hidden comments section I will explain why:

    I think I understand what regina1983 is saying here - NOT that Senator Clinton is trying to get racist people to vote for her, but that unfortunately some people are voting for her because they never would vote for a black man. I think that is true.

    regina1983 is not even claiming that Clinton is getting all the racist vote, only 30% of it.

    I think the person who pulled the zero rating trigger was too hasty, sometimes we have to get to grips with the idea that it is NOT only some Republicans (or Obama supporters etc. etc.) who are racist.

    'tis up to other voters if they think  regina1983's post should be sent  back to the hidden comments section.

  • Well, I assumed the point was something along the lines of Senator Clinton is better than Senator Obama. If that was not the point I certainly missed it.

    (of course, there is a possibility that you missed my point)

  • "If money is the best argument Obama has then he is in a world of hurt..."

    At the moment it is Hillary that has the most general election money so your suggestion that Obama is in a world of hurt is not a very good fit for this diary.

    (but people should be free to try hammer away  trying to put large square pegs into small round holes)

  • The hospital did not call Hillary a "big fat liar". It did not even say Hillary misspoke.

    Now, perhaps the hospital was implying a politician had used a story that had not been checked - and a Clinton spokesman agreed with that implication  "In this case, we did try but were not able to fully vet it".

    Kinda of ironic that a diary  was not reporting the truth when it said the hospital had called Hillary a "big fat liar".

  • "Happy and full of hope" good,  the politics of fear and misinformation not so good.

  • comment on a post NYT: Hillary's Health Care Tale is False over 6 years ago

    I heard Hillary tell this story a couple of times while watching her stump speeches on CNN Internet streaming.

    I have got to say that at the time I thought I hope she has double and triple checked the facts.

    This is not a matter of hindsight, somebody in her campaign team should have stepped in the first time she told the story. If she wins the nomination she will have to up her game if she (we) are to win the general election.

  • comment on a post Voices Of Reason Amidst The Derangement over 6 years ago

    Some people have an 'obsession' about the  release of the Clintons' tax returns.

    Some people on MyDD have an 'obsession' about the latest happenings at dailykos.

    The trick for us all  (a very hard trick) is to be as aware of our  own 'obsessions' as other people's 'obsessions'.

  • Well, that would be a good way to bury the news, but the thing about front pages is that they often feature the news.

    If somebody wants a comparative  discussion of Obama and Clinton's  approaches to the mortgage crisis to me a diary page is probably a very good place to do it.

    If you have got an interest in a particular topic it certainly seems to me better that you put the effort into creating a page about it rather than telling somebody else to do it.

  • To answer the question why her top strategist and advisor is off working on behalf of issues she purports to be opposed to:

    According to the last accounts the consulting firm he co-founded is owed  $2.5 million by the Hillary campaign.  He has got to earn a crust of bread somehow :-)

    (although to be serious I am surprised that he has got the time to do such things, I sorta assumed that Hillary's top managers would be working full time on the campaign)

  • Hillary was going to win big in PA before the Wright affair, so her winning in PA will not be much of an indication of how much damage  Wright has done to  Obama.

    But if somebody gave me a free bet I would bet that by the time of the PA vote enough time will have passed for both the Wright and Tuzla affairs to play very little part in voting preferences.

    As for the people you talk to, I reckon the important thing to remember is that people who spend much time talking about politics, posting about politics on the Internet, may not be representative of the voting population as a whole.

    And the people who you talk to and tell you what you want to hear may not even be representative of the people who talk about politics.

    That is why the posted poll is interesting, most of the people responding to it are not political 'junkies' such as we are.

  • By many reasonable objective assessments the Wright affair should have been far more damaging to Senator Obama than the Tuzla incident  should have been to Senator Clinton.

    Yet the contemporary tracking polls seem to indicate that Clinton took the bigger/longer hit.

    Perhaps the  difference is that Obama responded better than Clinton.

    Clinton has often claimed that she is / would be better at withstanding the Republican attack machine than Obama. Perhaps she is wrong.

  • I do not think it is the best idea to be always wary of candidates who raise a lot of money.

    Far better to restrict your wariness to somebody that raises big donations  from few people rather than small donations from a lot of  people.

    (indeed, one of the tactical problems that Senator Clinton  has at the moment is that her campaign team relied too heavily on big donations from fewer people. At the moment Senator Obama's campaign has shown itself to have a better solution by going for small donations from lots of people)


Advertise Blogads