Convention Match can’t be decided on spring training stats of the primary season.
Posted July 24, 2008on:
I was reminded of the video below while going over reader comments to the NYT article at The Caucus on the latest Denver Group ad. Some of the readers make it seem as though Americans have moved on. The casual voter, like the moving finger, voted, and having voted, moved on. To November, skipping past August.
Now, it’s hard to tell from casual scrolling of the comment file to guess how widespread the sentiment is. Just equally hard to judge how wide and deep the contrariwise sentiment, the PUMA attitude. Sure there are hundreds of web sites, but how many are really growling?
So, let’s watch it one more time.
The topic in May was of course the fate of the 2.5 million votes cast in MI and FL., but the ideas remain the same: count the vote, let people’s voice prevail. Let the process play out.
Speaking of the playing out, consider these stats, worn as a banner at many websites dedicated to HIllary.
The other nuggets of the Caucus article:
Calls to the Democratic National Committee were referred to the Obama campaign, and Bill Burton, a spokesman said: “We’re working out the details of the convention, and we’ll let people know when the specifics are worked out.
What is clear is that some of Mrs. Clinton’s supporters are not ready to give up the fight.
And here is why. People keep talking in sports analogy, so here goes.
In the elections, the primary season was like spring training, the convention ballot is like real games and matches – rules, credentials, platforms, keynotes, tributes etc. Following the same thought, the general election is the championship game. Winner take glory. Is that clear?
Now, it seems the Obama campaign, along with DNC which aided and abetted them along, wants us to determine the future based on spring training results. Is there any sports fan who would go for such nonsense?
Why not go to the convention, let each candidate go with their supporters, delegates and take part in a roll call. Afterall a roll call is just a vote, what is more American than voting. Or, to turn it around, who are the people in the world you think of when you think of NOT voting? Hmm let me see, a couple of big wars come to mind, when US sent in our fine men and women to kick some ass and restore something called democracy in some far off places, ring a bell?
But no, Howard Dean and Barack Obama want no voting at the convention, as has been done for the last one hundred years. Even Ronald Reagan, who had absolutely on one running against him, had a roll call taken in 1984, you know why? Tradition. That’s how we do it in America. We vote!
Why then do the Democrats of 2008 want no vote?
What are they telling us, worse, what are they NOT telling us?
It’s got to be more than cowardice.
The answer is simple: SEXISM
Pure and simple sexism. The most unfortunate part is how many women are buying it, accepting it, glad to wait their turn. Oh, let the man have it this time! There will be other women.
This is what I am afraid of. For every Democratic woman who is acqiescent today, there is a man somewhere who feels contrariwise about Obama, and is saying Not HIM!
By being quiet, these feeble minded women of today’s Democratic party, they are enabling countless and uncountable number of men and women who will out of sheer spite, prejudice, dislike or well considered reason, will not vote for the ‘official’ candidate. But we will never know how many or who.
It is only by standing up for Hillary that the party can avoid this ignominy.
Let the candidates stand up, be nominated, and voted on.
May the best woman win!