So I suppose I should just suck it up and tell y'all who I'm voting for on Tuesday. Now that Edwards is out of the race, Barack Obama has my vote.I wish I could say that it was a clear choice between Obama and HRC, but it wasn't. Honestly, the only viable progressive candidate in the race was Edwards. HRC, however, is one of the most polarizing figures of our time. As much as I would love to vote for a woman and have a woman as our Commander in Chief, I don't think it will happen with Senator Clinton. In fact, there's nothing that will motivate the Religious Right more on election day than the chance to vote against HRC.
McCain is clearly going to be the Republican nominee. While he's playing to his base right now, he's not nearly conservative enough for many Republicans. I'm not talking about the majority of Republicans here, but Republicans who make the most noise and preach from the pulpit. Some of those Republicans may very well stay home on election day. Unless HRC is the Democratic candidate.
Don't get me wrong, I like and respect Senator Clinton. I will forgive her a host of political missteps simply because I think she gets a raw deal from the mainstream media and mainstream America. Why? Because she's a tough, smart, involved, and politically aware woman. When HRC got involved in the universal health care debacle at the beginning of her husband's first term, people weren't enraged because of her policies. They were enraged because a wife was stepping into traditional male territory.
I, and many of the people I know well, tend to forget that while much of the country has taken giant leaps with respect to women, there are many out there stuck in 1958. I tend to forget because I don't often hear those antiquated voices. I'm a woman, yes, but I'm also a lawyer surrounded by progressive men and very well educated women. But every now and then I hear a whisper of times gone by and it stops me short.
Many might call me a sell out. Many would say I should support HRC for all the reasons I just stated. After all, things will never change if we don't actively work to change them. But what I'm trying to say with this post is that, while I think we're ready for the next step, a woman in charge, I don't think that HRC is the woman who can make that happen.
I'm afraid that if Clinton's candidacy fails, we'll be stuck with another 8 years of Republicans running roughshod over our civil rights. And based on statements McCain made today in Norfolk, Virginia, I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with a nice war in Iran to go with our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That can't happen.
I've just said an awful lot about why I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, but not a whole lot about why I'm voting for Barack Obama. I promise, that's next....
This post was originally written for a "Why Not Billary" post day on MOMocrats. Then Edwards dropped out and I had to rethink some things.
Labels: Barack Obama, Feminist Manifesto, Hillary Rodham Clinton, John McCain, Politics
25 Comments:
you and me both, LM. and, and...
i think we have so much community (re)building to do around the world thanks to the Bush dynasty. She is not a community builder -- it's not in her nature.
I don't care for HRC...AT ALL! But...if I'm being honest...I don't care for McCain either! (and I am a Republican)
I feel very conflicted about this election! UGH! :(
I'm with Ann Coulter. Romney was the best chance we had to save the republic. He's a visionary as a businessman, capable of finding market solutions to health care, capable of dealing with both parties to get things accomplished. Of the two Democrats, though, I'd much prefer Obama. He has a more positive attitude and demeanor, and he doesn't strike me as literally evil, while Hillary does. I think he could turn out to be a very good president, should he win. McCain could be a terrible president for so many reasons - too much of a maverick to be an effective commander in chief, too liberal on fiscal policy to help the economy in the least, and too much of a flip-flopper in general to truly be trusted. I'd love to see Ann Coulter start a write-in campaign as she discussed on Hannity & Colmes. Here's hoping the story is still yet to be written on who will be president.
how about I just don't like her?
Robert, I'm not sure I could get on board with any candidate endorsed by Ann Coulter!
at the end of the day the decision can't come down to whether a black man or a white woman is the best bet. it has to be on their policies and track record, although there is no denying the message that a black person in the white house would send to the world and to the american people.
we have had a woman prime minister in the uk. when she first got in all my feminist friends were saying what a great thing it was. but thatcher did more to harm women than any male prime minister ever did.
i'm with you on this one.
If I could vote, it would definitely be democrat but whom of the two? That is a tough one. I'm not looking at female of black, I'm looking at whom is the person for the country. I like Obama but can he really pull it off when reality hits or is he just a rhetorical genius? Like I said, it's a tough one, so I'm interested in your opinion on Obama ...
Glad to hear you'll be voting for Obama!
If Obama weren't in the race I would have voted for Edwards over Hillary. But now that it's a choice between Barack and Hillary, the choice is clear for me. I've been a supporter of Barack Obama since early last year. I'm just so happy that he is a viable candidate and he could really win this thing.
I am in the same boat as you, having wished Joe Biden stayed in the race, and now Edwards.
I am torn as well. I honestly have my doubts about Obama being able to cut it, he seems more a showman to me than a man of action. But HRC? They hit the nail on the head when they called her a "corporate politician".
More important to me is that a Democrat is in the White House. I think HRC will put the right people in charge under her (which as a collective group are really the people running the show). I don't know about Obama though. Mostly because I just don't know that much about him to be honest.
Either way, with a Democrat at the top, be it a woman or a black man, we are making strides. I think in the end, I will swing my vote to the one that looks like they will make it to push my vote and make it count more. A sell out, but for the right cause at least.
I couldn't vote for her in my primaries-- I don't respect the compromises she's made in her personal life, and I don't trust that she has learned anything from any of her negative experiences except to get better at hiding her skeletons. The whole siege mentality that the Clintons have always operated under , even against other democrats, leaves me no hope that she can heal any of the deep social wounds we have suffered under Shrub.
Obama may not have experience, but he has solid principles, inspiration, and a true desire to heal. He can hire people with experience.
ah. see, but here's my thing about O, he's running on the change platform but so much of what he's talking about is centrist, compromise and middle of the road, and that isn't the change i want. i want a revolution. i'm not saying HRC is about that, b/c she's not. i suppose what i'm saying is it's not really either of them for me, but of course, it'll be whichever one is on the ticket. but i can't quite have the love affair i want to, b/c neither of them brought the right flowers to the dance.
so i'll go back to missing edwards, and knowing either are better than the bastard we've got now, but i've yet to fall for either one.
So is Ann Coulter's plan to support Hillary the real reason you're supporting Barack? (just kidding)
I honestly think the policies the Democrats want to put in regarding taxation threaten to send us into the recession the media is pretending has already started. The fact is, we are still in a growth period, albeit a slow one, but we are close enough to recession that we need to cut taxes, not raise them, and keep them cut.
The government needs to get out of a lot of fields more than it needs to get into more. It has failed in so many ways whenever it has tried to do what private citizens were already doing. Social Security is threatening to go bankrupt, welfare threatens to bankrupt us all, and the creation of both were followed by individuals not doing as much to take care of themselves and private entities doing less to help the less fortunate.
Mitt has a legitimate plan to help everyone get health care privately instead of through the government. He also understands the need to fix the tax structure instead of just pulling a few bills off the top of the stack and tossing it into the wind for one big push (which is how the proposed stimulus package feels). He managed to do a lot as governor of the most liberal state of the union, which says he can work with both parties to get things accomplished. That's why I support him, not because of Ann Coulter.
Well, Mitt managed to call me and all of my "ilk" a traitor in his "concession" speech. Sounds like great consensus building.
There's no dispute that SS needs reform. I think, however, that many people have serious misconceptions about welfare and who uses it. The typical welfare recipient is not the welfare queen we hear so much about, but a white middle aged, divorced woman with two kids. The thing is, the elimination of welfare and SS will hurt women the most. Because women bear the brunt of other, undervalued and unpaid jobs. The private sector hasn't done a damn thing to change that and I seriously doubt it ever will.
This comes down to the fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats - how we see the role of government. There are certain sectors of the population that need help and I don't see private industry or charities fulfilling that role. And don't kid yourself, it didn't happen before SS and welfare were around either. We live in a different world now entirely. We can't go back to pre-depression era government.
As for health care, I, and many democrats, think health care should be a right, not a privilege. And in fairness, most of the Democrats were *not* proposing a single payer, government funded system but mandating insurance coverage. For those who can't afford it, the government will provide options. Frankly, it's a travesty that there are uninsured children in the richest nation on earth. Plus, the uninsured also increase costs for the rest of us if you want to look at it solely in a cold blooded, fiscal manner. The rising cost of health insurance is making the U.S. a less attractive place for businesses. It's pretty darn easy to move overseas. Many businesses will actually welcome a system of mandatory insurance if it relieves some of their financial burden and helps to contain costs.
This is fun, Robert! Thanks for coming over and commenting.
Yep. I voted (via internet) on Tuesday and posted about why I went with Obama. Bottom line: more likeable than HRC and he can beat McCain.
Because we can't take another Republican administration right now, we just can't.
Well that's at least two votes in VA for Obama.
And that Romney concession speech??!! Don't even get me started.
I wrote and rewrote a response to you three times (thanks to my computer suddenly deciding to crash all afternoon). It grew too long to expect you to read here, so I'll post it on my site. I invite you to read it there.
See what I did was a cop out humorous graphic that announced I was Baracking the vote. It's because I would not could not explain.
But here? You do so well, elaborating out well the exact reasons I have.
Muchas gracias.
Thank god you finally saw the light! (I am so kidding. Sorta.) It's always a choice of imperfects, to me. I know you and jen and others I respected loved Edwards but I had my own problems with him. I hope Obama wins the primary. I am truly, deeply worried that the Clinton siege mentality mentioned above is going to tank the entire Democratic party and we will have McCain to call president next January.
AH, Gwen, I knew you'd be pleased! I have to admit the siege mentality bothers me a lot.
I'm missing Biden, as my heart kind of belonged to him and his craziness. But...sigh...I have a feeling I'll be voting for Obama in April. A clean, fresh start. Something different. Not a Bush, not a Clinton. Something else entirely.
Totally off subject, but I was so excited to find another Democratic military spouse in Hampton Roads! Now that makes all of 2 of us!
Happy Primary Day....
auburn93rn - I know another one. That makes THREE of us!
I actually work with some attorneys who are Democrats AND former military too. I guess that might be part of why they're former military....
LM, I hear what you're saying and you know you and I are in total agreement on Edwards. But I ultimately came down on the Hillary side (see my post today). Even though I had all those same thoughts about HRC as I ruminated, I decided not to look down the road and pick who I thought was the better candidate now. Don't get me wrong -- I'm happy with ANY Democrat that takes back the White House.
And thanks for guest-posting for me while we were away. Still friends? ;)
Great post, LM. I think I am leaning towards HRC for the PA primary (in April), but I share the concerns you have articulated so well.
It is always difficult to balance 1) the candidate who best represents one's views with 2) the candidate with the best chance of beating the Republican nominee.
I feel that there is an undercurrent of sexism in the anti-HRC rhetoric. It's not as explicit as "I wouldn't vote for a woman," but the nature of the criticisms seems to me tied to how a woman appears when she is trying to fit herself into a (male) presidential mold. Just one woman president would alter the nature of that mold forever, IMHO, and I can't wait for that time.
I completely agree with you. Nothing will bring out the Republican in voters like HRC on the Democratic ballad. I think Obama has the ability to pluck the more moderate Republicans from John McCain, as well.
The idea of even four more years of another "war" president makes me shiver. I hope Obama picks his running mate well.
Post a Comment
<< Home