Print This Post
May
21
I just left the following as a comment at Plunderbund. You can read the post and comment thread here. Polls are showing that the +50 year old female demographic is showing far less mobility in their allegiance than pretty much all demographics when it comes to the Democratic primary race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Warning: I use expletives, and I’m not taking them out.
I’ll take you at face value, Eric knowing I get burned all the time as you yourself have seen.
Your question was: “How is someone supposed to convince voters to side with him when they vote for his opponent knowing she will not win and claim they will not support him once he wins the nomination as they are predicting?”
You went on to answer it for yourself. You already know I disagree with your recommendation but for the record:
You can’t convince the group of voters you’re talking about in this post to side with, I think you meant “her” opponent. That’s not going to happen.
So what can you do?
1. You let them vent.
2. You try to discern the common issues important to them and to you (or the other opponent).
3. You offer as much as you can to help them see how the opponent is not only not an opponent, but in fact is an ally.
4. How do you do that? With facts.This is all about building trust. People who already feel screwed, legitimately or not, don’t want to feel like they’re setting themselves up just to be screwed again. You read this kind of fear over and over in the rants from the Clinton Supporters Count Too people.
If not having this group “side” with the opponent is in fact such a huge problem, then the person finding it to be a huge problem has JUST AS MUCH OF AN OBLIGATION TO SOLVE IT. It is PURE AND UTTER NONSENSE in terms of negotiating and mediating and getting this particular crowd of voters to see the choice you want them to make as something they can do if you – the side that sees them as a problem – is completely unwilling to step forward.
Should it be that way? Who the hell knows. But it’s not about the way it should be or has always been. It’s about the way you want it to be and what you have to do to get there.
5. So you build the trust, but in this case, it has to be organic – that means, these voters have to really feel it. If they don’t feel it, they won’t change their allegiance.
Yes – I agree – Clinton has to send the signal that she is going to do that too. But again, part of the deep-seated piece for this particular cohort of women – primarily that 50 and older demographic – is that they’ve lived their lives saying sisters are going to do it for themselves. So part of them is saying, Well shit, what the fuck do we need men for? Fuck that shit. We’ll find our own way.
And so they really honestly in their heart believe and are okay with letting men screw themselves.
Therefore – if you see that attitude as a complete barrier to the success of the opponent, well then, you don’t win them over by telling them that they need you and must come to you because that’s the way it’s always been. They will laugh in your face. They are the generation that’s lived to prove that they can do it on their own or will die trying. Seriously.
Rather – you have to find what matters to them: their daughters and granddaughters, as well as their sons and grandsons.
This is why I am dedicated to efforts like the White House Project that helps me work on the challenge to be sure that there are more than enough women always ready and able to run and to win.
6. Then, you can’t break the trust. The issues that are in common and the methods for addressing them have to be followed through on, at all levels. From now through and after the general election.
It’s actually really very simple, Eric – strategists and advisors figure out how to target and microtarget all the time.
This situation should be viewed as exactly the same thing – but the tactics that will be used to address this group? Well – those may have to be as unprecedented as anything else we’ve seen in the last 17 mos.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:53 am May 21st, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Democrats, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Social Issues, Voting, WH2008, Women
Comments
35 Responses to “How to approach the +50yo female Clinton Supporters Count Too voters”
Mothers Mean Business When It Comes to Governing
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2011 Campaign Innovator Award
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish-
Jill I think that you are 100% accurate. Telling these women that they need to fall into line and suck it up is never going to work. They feel that their candidate was slighted, and there are many men that agree, myself included. However, I am not saying that they should not support the party nominee. That will have to be a decision that they make on their own. But falling into line has never been the MO of this generation of women and change never comes about through acceptance of an injustice.
Thanks, J. It is nice to know that not everyone thinks I’m speaking a foreign language.
Even if Le Monde was in French.
What about picker her- or another woman- as his running mate?
Do you think that would help?
Honestly – thinking about that kind of a choice is far less simple for me. Women and anger and what they need to get the anger to subside and move on – much easier for me.
Where this gets very complicated is here:
If Clinton isn’t on the ticket, the supporters get to continue to grouse. Now, they are still possible voters for Obama, but they also get to keep complaining – to some (NOT TO ME) but to some, that is a part of the whole process and raison d’etre.
If Clinton is on the ticket, well, that satisfies in part, BUT they will or they may still say, oh so big fucking deal – and then they will say, if he wins, he won because of her and she should have run on her own.
Seriously. This will be some of the thoughts that this group will have. And others too, to be honest. The questions will always be out there.
Which is why I keep writing that Obama is in control here – it is up to him.
To truly engage people who so didn’t want you in the first place, you have to make them feel that they aren’t being traitors and that you (Obama) can actually accomplish what they want accomplished – that he is a reasonable and acceptable surrogate for Clinton.
I know this sounds weird, but if you think about it, it really is the case. You/we are asking them to substitute someone with whom many find fault for someone they placed on a pedestal – right or wrong.
It is really really really hard for this core group to let go, Joseph. People need to understand just how hard. And then figure out what can win them over.
The calculus about putting her on the ticket is very complicated for the people who’ve worked politics all their adult life. I really am not sure if that is the answer. It solves a bunch of things, but it could also cause problems.
I just don’t know.
Do you think that the core Obama supporters would accept her on the ticket?
Frankly, I’m not sure Obama has the maturity to have her on the ticket with him. There’s an imbalance that concerns me in how he might speak to her, govern her – I don’t know. Might not be worth the effort.
Picking a different woman might be a good idea.
But frankly, picking Ted Strickland is looking more and more like what might need t be done.
Like I proposed this morning, we need a survey to find out.
You could ask, but I don’t think anyone in this die-hard voter group (not me) is ready to answer those questions yet. And there is the Drew Weston theory about emotion and the polls. There aren’t a lot of tea leaves here.
Take a cue from your leader: use the social networks to figure this out – not the polls.
“your leader”. you continue to perpetuate the divide by using this kind of language. guess what? he’s OUR leader. he’s winning the nomination and will be the nominee. all the cutting off of noses will not change that.
imagine if she won and obama supporters were flipping out. they’d be told by hillary supporters to get their asses in line and elect the first woman president. by these very same delusional women!
…and we all know it.
clinton treated unfairly? give me a f***ing break. she ran a s**t campaign with no plan after super tuesday and she got her ass kicked. she then went into the gutter and “as far as i know” race baited her way back into some modicum of respectability by winning over stupid white people. Sorry, but the demographics tend to agree with me here – you can dislike the way i put it, but calling it “blue collar” won’t do. There are plenty of hard working “blue collar” blacks she did not win over. dumb whites in appalachia she rules though!
get the f*** in line indeed. we have an election to win people! all this gnashing of teeth over a failed candidacy is precisely what is not needed. i really wish hillary would take some leadership here so we can move on. obama is doing everything he can to let her have a soft landing. her willingness to drag this thing on while deep in debt and no chance of actually winning is telling to me. no wonder these women are ready to light a match to it all – they are following THEIR leader.
f***ing democrats…
Eric – if that was directed at me, then thank you for showing how well you heard what I wrote.
You prove just how hard it is to convince people of something about which they are, as you seem to be, adamantly sure is the only way to see something.
I’m confident the ‘shut up and get in line’ method isn’t going to work here even though all the candidates (except for Kucinich) have been saying all along that they would support the eventual nominee.
It’s gone too far for that.
I say we throw them both out and bring back Joe Biden.
I’m telling you – I learned my lesson. Support and support early. Big mistake I made and have usually made. Will definitely be thinking about how to change that, in action.
Well, Jill, I think these women will fall in line, because it is entirely too important not to vote for Obama. I don’t fit the mold. I’m over 60. I was an Edwards supporter. I became an Obama supporter. We can’t just ignore this election. It’s so important. My husband keeps telling his adult children that it’s the most important election of his lifetime.
You know, when somebody I liked got kicked off American Idol too soon, I said I’d never watch it again. Guess what? I watched the finals last night. We all say things in the heat of battle that seem different in the light of day. The day you go vote is a battle. After time passes, you realize what you have to do to survive long term. When Bush won the second time, I honestly looked for a house in Costa Rica. Well, I’m still here and still fighting battles, because I care too much about my life in the next years, however many there are, and I care about what happens to those who are still here after I am gone.
If Hillary somehow gets the nomination, I’ll probably fume and scream and cry and say I won’t vote for her. But you know what? In the end I will. Not because I’m caving or sucking it up. Because it’s too important to keep McCain out of the White House. Supreme Court, everybody. Supreme Court.
Muffet – I agree with you – I think the numbers who will choose to vote for McCain or not vote at all can’t be estimated at this time – but they will be knowable eventually and we don’t know if they are statistically significant.
I’m mostly interested in using the lesson of their anger as a way to change what we disliked about the campaigning – the treatment of women, but not just that. There was a lot to dislike and neither men nor women should make some of the mistakes Clinton (or Obama for that matter) made.
As Democrats who want to win and win more often and hopefully win with more and more women, we owe it to ourselves to understand.
But yes – I think your position is far more common.
So – when are you signing up for Go Run!
“You let them vent” “particular cohort of women” “keep complaining” “govern her”..Jill, Jill, do you not realize that this type of language is diminishing?? demeaning??…we woman, still, are the best at putting our own kind down – well, it wasn’t just men who kept women from the vote.
We are not menopausal maniacs on a “rant” or just “People who already feel screwed”. Many do not view Hillary as “someone they placed on a pedestal”..We see Hillary’s flaws. Many, such as myself, who are very anti-Iraq war, took a lot of soul searching, information and observation of all the candidates, and low and behold, found Hillary to really be the better candidate.( Her health plan is really superior to most . Having lived in Europe for many years ,my eyes opened up to better ways to provide universal health care.) We are not in need of a “leader” , but of someone who will really get some needed work done.
“you have to make them feel that they aren’t being traitors” ?To whom – to Hillary- no – it is to ourselves to whom we do not want to be traitors. Although emotion will always play a part for everyone, no matter how denied – because we are humans, we have real reasons for not voting for Obama.. Age can be a very clarifying thing, it can help you see through and not accept a lot of bull, not fall for just a pretty speech. For the most of us, Obama is seriously lacking, too much ego, fear of criticism, and hypocritical, definitely not unifying – we have been there before! I say we/us because I have spoken to many women across this nation and the consensus is amazing . Yes, the media’s bias has awakened our “anger” but it is not something to merely “move-on” from.(there should be a poll to see how much a roll main stream played in forming peoples opinions this year) Yes, there will be those swayed to get in line, however, for many of us who have been lifelong loyal democrats , who have been the party’s activists do not see a line we wish to fit into. We do not see that the way to bring about needed change. We are a group to be respected – talk, discuss , passionately , if you wish – but demean, discount – well , even if you don’t realize it, you’d be doing to yourself…..
Jodi – I’m sorry you read what I wrote as demeaning. I will think about that, but all those terms I use describe recognized behavior that related to phases of loss plus my effort to restrain it solely to a particular group of voters who would rather leave and/or injure the Democratic party than continue to change it.
I take responsibility for describing it the way I observe it, and I appreciate you pushing back on the way I see it.
How do you describe the behavior of the voters involved in Clinton Supporters Count Too and Never Obama and groups like that?
They have listed this blog as being “very negative.” I certainly don’t see it that way but they’re entitled – from their perspective, since I don’t support their position of writing in Clinton or voting for McCain or not voting at all, I’m negative.
I agree with a lot that you say and think, Jodi. I’ve made the case that no supporter of a non-nominated candidate should be treated as someone who should just fall in.
I wrote a post a couple of months ago in which I got raked over the coals because I objectd to Obama’s “Join” ad at the Super Bowl. Hated it. Hated the concept of it.
So – let’s not let the one-dimensional nature of the Internet lead us to draw the wrong conclusions or inferences from one another.
As I’ve written multiple times, I’ve not been interested in Clinton or Obama – they have been equally low on my totem pole – I recognize all the flaws you enumerate in Obama.
I’ve been focusing these particular posts re: Clinton Supporters Count too on the process that people go through – the choices they make – when push comes to shove.
Again – in my lingo, vent is an extremely neutral word – but to the extent that it conveys some diminishment, I’d be interested to know what you would substitute.
Thanks for taking the time to leave the comment, and reading. I know you are engaged and I appreciate it.
To answer your question in an earlier comment, I would be unenthusiastic about Clinton as veep, for two reasons: I don’t think she is the one best suited to shore up Obama’s weaknesses (she’s not from a swing state, and there are obviously people who will appeal more to the almighty “white working class”); and I flat out don’t trust her and her husband to put Obama first. It would come across as a co-presidency and the Clintons would strongly encourage this perception.
I won’t say “shut up and get in line,” but I do think it’s fair to question the maturity of people who would cast a vote for president based on something other than a genuine appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. If someone legitimately feels that Obama is unqualified to be president, they are within their rights to not vote for him. But if their argument is “I’m not going to vote for the person who beat my preferred candidate,” that’s such an illogical thing to say that meeting it with logic would seem futile. If they believe the process was rigged, they need to spell out why and not simply say things like “caucuses were unfair to Hillary” (because she chose not to contest them?).
And a lot of people aren’t going to like me bringing this up, but the 50-and-older group, the men as well as the women, are disproportionately represented among those who will not vote for Obama on racial grounds. I think it’s safe to say that most of these folks don’t vote in Democratic primaries anymore, but there’s still some out there as we have seen in some of the recent races. That has to be seen as a possible reason why older women are less apt to close ranks–not, as some have said, because they are mostly second wave feminists angry about sexist treatment of Clinton, but because so many of them are uncomfortable voting for African-Americans. I’m not sure how that gets changed in 5 months.
And on the sexism front: now that we know from exit polling that those who took gender into account in Kentucky voted FOR Clinton disproportionately, can we please put this to bed? There’s no question that sexism exists and that Obama has gotten some votes from the pig demographic, but they’re outweighed by those who are pro-Clinton primarily because she’s a woman.
Wiley – thanks – that’s a very reasonable comment. I can’t disagree with any of it, really. I’m not certain of some of the speculation about reasons why people vote for or against – people deceive themselves as much as they deceive others too. But yeah I have found myself thinking a lot of what you’ve written too.
The only think I might change is saying that it’s immature to stomp your feet. It IS immature but in the historical context of Clinton’s presence and strength in the campaign, I’d probably be a bit more lenient. Likewise, I’ll give leniency to the immaturity of a lot of overzealous Obama supporters – totally out of control sometimes with the adoration. But that’s just my opinion.
I get very tired when I see the allegations that Clinton race baits. I’d like to see some examples of this, and not of her husband. I’m sick of seeing people demean the fact that women vote for Clinton because she is a woman yet don’t discuss the fact that African Americans are voting for Obama. Doesn’t it go both ways? I don’t think that either of these groups votes solely on those standards. And I am not a woman and I voted for Clinton. Where does that place me in their neat little schema?
I think that the “fall in line” strategy is a risky one that both sides are playing this time around. It is going to backfire big on one side. As of now, Obama people are not really helping things by bashing the Clinton supporters.
jill, I didnt know you ever used swear words. I am kind of impressed. So is Dick Cheney.
Ben – you are buttering me up for something – what is it?
Glad you are back safely – sounds like your travels were a real journey.
Re: the swear words. I like to think I’m a good example of how powerful they can be when used sparingly – you know that when I use them, it’s because I mean it in full force. Not some casual I’m too lazy to really care.
These voters are PISSED, they are over the top and they want to be heard. How people cannot see that and realize that it’s just like staring down a four year old having a temper tantrum, I can’t understand.
But the approach for me is the same: letting them do their thing, listen and then, when they are “Accessible” – figure out what’s going on and what’s the matter. Always be the adult – not the other playmate saying you’ll do what I want or else.
Now – one commenter took me to task for having a demeaning tone about this – I do not mean it that way – I just mean it in an anger management kind of way – I mean, what else do you do with someone who is angry as these supporters are? Seriously. so – while I’m sorry if it seems demeaning, there just are not a lot of choices.
J. Rowsey, I wasn’t demeaning “the fact that women vote for Clinton because she is a woman,” because it’s understandable. My comment was in reference to the CNN exit poll that showed that of the 16% of Kentucky voters who said that gender affected their vote, 79% voted for Clinton (cf. 65% overall). 16% is obviously a minority, but Clinton won a huge chunk of that minority. Clinton also won 55% of the Oregon voters who said gender was a factor in their vote, substantially better than among those who disagreed. Interestingly, she also won among people who said that race impacted their vote, so both race and sex seemed to work to her benefit.
I certainly concede that poll answers on emotional questions like these are tricky, because people will lie (that is, not be willing to admit they won’t vote for a woman). But there’s not much in these numbers to show that being a woman is a negative for Clinton.
As a 59 y/o Clinton supporter,let me agree that you do not get me to change my mind by casting aspersions on my intellect or social status. I need good, solid reasons why your candidate is the answer to my problems. Thus far I have not been terribly impressed with the Obama outreach to a very large group of swing voters who will be desperately needed in November, If each and every blogger could see themselves as an advocate for their candidate, this would go a great deal better. “Vote for Obama or you’re a menopausal, viscious, racist, dumb, bitter piece of crap” is not going to convince me that your candidate is worth supporting. Give it some thought now and save yourselves some grief later.
Lynda – precisely. Thanks for reading and commenting.
Jill, how many times do we hear vent, rant, in association with a male as opposed to female? Sure,it can be used for both, tcha….The point is, this is not just venting, ranting, this is a serious issue that goes way beyond winning this election. How many elections have we been told -” this is the crucial one, so compromise”?and we throw another rug over the rotting, moldy floorboards. Well, the rugs are just too threadbare and the mold is showing:
“What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system” Gloria Steinem NY Times, January 8, 2008…
This campaign season has exposed just too much disparity, I cannot close my eyes to it. If a woman had not been in the race?
Maybe people, not just women, when they reach their 50′s, start to realize patterns more, start to see how far there is still to go and either give in or take on the fight.
I have only seen ‘Clinton Supporters Count too’ once, on TV, I don’t know what behavior you are referring to- if its about not voting for O, I agree with them. And by the by, its not up to Clinton to decide for us, this goes beyond her .The democratic party is also our party, it is not about revenge on the party – it’s about real change. We want the party to become what it supposedly stands for (or may be we should just start a women’s party, hmmn). It is the policies of the backrooms that are hurting the dems , not those of us with courage to speak out & face our problems.
Well – I think you are backtracking here a bit, Jodi.
I’ve got some education and experience in mental health and phrases like venting and ranting are used in a pretty gender-neutral way, in my experience. It’s not gender-specific nomenclature the way, say, “hysterical” is.
Let me tell you what I find most disingenuous about the “we won’t vote for Obama” stuff by people who say that they are Democrats and want change:
Why is this level of discourse happening at this juncture? Why not when Clinton first entered the race? Why not when other women have announced for the primaries? Why not when other women have run for other offices?
Why this boycott, now? Or, as you say, “It is the policies of the backrooms that are hurting the dems , not those of us with courage to speak out & face our problems.”
You aren’t suggesting that this is the first time that’s being noticed? So – why now?
Also – you have not addressed my concerns about how saying “now or never” really disses all the efforts of groups like the Women’s Campaign Forum and She Should Run and the White House Project.
If we were to follow your strategy consistently, then every single female voter involved in a race that results from the efforts of the groups I just named would boycott the victor in the Democratic races that those women lose to men.
That’s insane – to say that unless the woman wins when she runs, we will not vote for the man.
HOWEVER – if some group really existed to push that on a regular basis, at least it would be more believable than just this protest no Obama stuff.
You can tie it to age if you want – I don’t think that does any good though for the legitimate concerns raised about sexism being ingrained and rampant. But – your comment, your perspective. I don’t share that one.
You guys just don’t get it do you? WE are not going to fall in line and 4 years of John McCain is alot better than 8 years of OB.
Jill Miller Zimon: That’s insane – to say that unless the woman wins when she runs, we will not vote for the man.
Indeed. Having her followers tank the election for a fellow dem certainly won’t help Hillary if/when she decides to run again and you can damn well bet that when the next woman runs for the nomination that she’ll have to do it while the pundits speculate on whether her supporters will react the same way if she faces defeat.
Rose: You guys just don’t get it do you? WE are not going to fall in line and 4 years of John McCain is alot better than 8 years of OB.
Please elaborate — in what ways would it be better? Is McCain now claiming to be a strong proponent of women’s issues? Has he reconsidered his promise to stack the SC with strict conservatives? I suppose it’s possible he has as he seems to change his positions on issues about twice a week.
Jill, I appreciate your honesty in describing how you might apply basic anger-management techniques when in conversation with livid HRC supporters, but the four-year-old comparison is, of course, demeaning: the anger of a deeply experienced 50+ voter is probably not the same as the anger of a truculent toddler, and needs more parsing.
In any case, anger-management approaches probably aren’t going to work with people like me, who aren’t primarily angry, but primarily exhausted and uninspired (and I’m only 45). As I’ve described elsewhere, while a supporter of HRC I always believed, until fairly recently, I would be able, eventually, to get behind the, in my eyes, patently less-qualified Obama. The interior resistance emerged the day pundits prematurely pronounced the race “over,” and HRC’s image was removed from the television’s screen, leaving it split between McCain and Obama. Unexpectedly, the still-historic nature of the race did not leap out at me. What I saw, after all, was not so radically different from what I had been seeing since I was a little girl: two men, this time of merely adequate gifts. I felt (and still feel) incredibly . . . flat.
The challenge for the Obama campaign, relative to someone like me, is to inspire me; I would be happy for them to do it. I’m afraid pure rhetoric and emptily persuasive techniques aren’t going to work, though. If Obama is indeed the eventual nominee, to earn my vote he will need to move past vague effusions and into direct action. I’ve stated before my interest in seeing a strong VP selection who is also happens to be a woman. Other possibilities would be direct and public pronoucements of his plans to enhance the success of women in public life (e.g., a stated commitment to upping the fallen number of women on the Supreme Court), and, overall, a forceful willingness to confront gender issues and their role (which has been intense though not total) relative to the split in the Democratic Party. He will need to overcome his tendency to condescend; he will need, by god, to show conviction and courage in this area. While the jury hasn’t actually convened on any of this (because it can’t yet), my guess is he will not do any of these things, because a) he will be too worried about their ramifications for the GE, and b) he will believe my support to be automatic (where else is sweetie supposed to go?). You are sensitive enough to imagine how I’ll completely flatline confronted with such truisms.
So: absent concrete demonstrations by Obama, there is really very little you or others can do to convince people like me to vote for him. My best advice would be to address your “own” candidate (in quotes because I know and recognize the recent history of your support for him). I agree we must vote in the best interests of our country. I am, however, also a part of that country.
BTW, another long day: I mistakenly posted this comment to another thread first. Please feel free to pull it off that one if you want to.
Thanks, as always, for the great discussions.
Please don’t engage Rose in this discussion.
She is OBVIOUSLY a McCain operative pretending to be Democrat.
Would someone please point out to me how Hillary Clinton is orchestrating this or pulling the strings of this group? To say that this isn’t good for her future…she isn’t calling for her supporters to boycott Obama. Some of them are coming to that conclusion on their own.
Jason Rowsey: Would someone please point out to me how Hillary Clinton is orchestrating this or pulling the strings of this group?
Hillary has absolutely nothing to do with this group but they are orchestrating the boycott in her name. If the last six months have taught us anything it’s that guilt-by-association stories are popular in the media and damaging to the candidate no matter how tenuous the association is.
Personally, I still think Hillary has a shot at the nomination. All that stands between it and her is credible evidence of a major slip-up by Obama. If the SDs believe he’s no longer a viable candidate, they’ll defect to Hillary en masse. If Obama has already made such a slip-up you can bet that there are no shortage of people looking to uncover it.
Ironically, the one thing that could prevent even a major slip-up from derailing Obama is the fact that partisan nutballs have already made so many bogus claims about him that a real one could very well be written off as bogus.
@#28 Tired of Voting for Men (I love that blog name btw, was just listening to a radio story about the mess of our county government – almost all men in charge):
About the temper tantrum analogy:
You are right. It isn’t the kindest analogy and I’m not sure it’s defensible, but here’s how I felt, as the blog author reading comment after comment after comment, all of them in capitals, that profess things like, “NO NO I WILL NEVER DO X!!!!!!!!!”
In blog-speak, in email speak – in cyberspeak – that’s basically kicking and screaming.
So – imagine, if you were face to face with an adult or a child who spoke to you the way those characters represent the tone and level at which they’re speaking. I believe you’d be watching someone have a tantrum.
So – okay – not nice on my part – but I’m not sure how else to express the extreme nature of that kind of “speak” in a comment, if others who frequent blogs or use e-mail know what I mean.
How about this insteaad, since it’s also true:
Okay, everybody in both camps stop acting like four-year-olds i.e., leaving comments that look like this: NO WAY NEVER NEVER NEVER OBAMA and SCOTUS/IRAQ YOU IDIOTS BLOOD IS ON YOUR HANDS.
Now – if people want to continue to leave comments in all caps with all kinds of exclamations marks, they should realize that folks who converse will see that type of contribution as one that may properly be treated as shouting and possibly kicking and screaming – adult or otherwise.
Is that a wee bit better?
Muffet: if you’re still reading this thread and you have the wherewithal to afford that place in Costa Rica I would implore you to reconsider. It may not matter one whit who wins in November, the fuse may have been lit on the US economy and no one can extinguish it.
Kunstler’s latest: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/86087/
The more I see of McCain in the media, even on Ellen for *&@*sakes, the more I think the fix is ultimately in for him.
To say I’m worried about the second half of 2008 is putting it mildly.
We may be raging in a closed room here. Just for perspective.
Jill: thanks for all you are doing in providing a forum for this discussion. I’m getting more out of reading your posts and these comments than in most progressive national websites combined.
Thanks very much for that, Bad American. Hey – if it leads to being called “very negative” by Hillary Clinton supporters or McCain surrogates masquerading as Clinton supporters, it has to be good, right?
Jill:
Yes indeed. But remember when being a peacemaker and dialog facilitator in this environment that no good deed goes unpunished.
By the way, as an addendum to my advice to muffet, I just ran across this in Huffpo. It seems that no less a figure than Chalmers Johnson agrees with me:
http://tinyurl.com/5ng4dr
And you know what? I’m really starting to get nervous.