OK - so a good friend of mine - now living in NC - asked me to tell him why he and his wife should vote for Barack Obama. I sent him some things I'd already written, but I also wrote this. Yes - It's long. Of course - after I sent it he sent me an Email telling me he wouldn't make me work anymore and that he and his wife were already planning on voting for Obama in tomorrow's primary. Sigh. That's ok - well worth my effort! Anyway - here you go!
Hey Chris - here's the long version! I agree with you - in that they're both strong candidates. In regards to views and voting records, they're pretty much the same which means it all comes down to character in my mind. She's good at policy - very knowledgeable - no doubt about that. I think he's got a good head on his shoulders and is going for president for better reasons. Were she to get the nomination, though, I would vote for her in the fall. I don't want another 4 years of a Republican administration. We need to take over – all around. And then…we truly need to accomplish something otherwise we’ll lose the majority in Congress in 2010. Here's one, admittedly unfair, concern about Hillary Clinton. For the last 20 years, we've had the same two families in the White House. For the good of the country, we need a different bloodline in there. Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton...I want someone else in there. I prefer Obama for a variety of reasons and these aren't going to be in any particular order. Foreign Policy, Management ability, Judgment, a Consistent message, Experience, Religion and politics, Gas tax...
As for Iran…from MSNBC First Read: 'Obliterate?' Israel can defend itself. NBC's Robert Windrem weighed in on Hillary Clinton pledging to "obliterate" Iran if it strikes Israel with nuclear weapons (it doesn't yet have). Israel does not need the US to counter attack. Israel has the world's sixth largest arsenal of nuclear weapons, behind only the US, Russia, China, the UK and (maybe) France. It can handle ANY Iranian threat on its own, thank you very much. Israel has a second strike capability, that is, a capability of striking any enemy even if that enemy has already destroyed Tel Aviv. Israel has enough capability to deliver a society-smashing blow on Iran within hours. Iran would be triumphant, and then incapable of functioning as a society, in very short order. And there isn't a strategic thinker in the Middle East who doesn't know that, as should Senator Clinton. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/05/981106.aspx Strategy: Bush's strategy was based on capturing Hussein. Once done, he figured they'd be all happy, they'd welcome a democracy and we could go home. For 4000+ years people have lived on that plot of land - never once has there been a democracy, much less a functional one. Expecting them to put one together when they don't even have a basic understanding of the *concept* of democracy, is simply arrogant presumption on our part. Bush did not plan for ANY other contingency but a happy ending. The ol’ "sit in a circle, hold hands and sing Kum Ba Ya" contingency.” Clinton's campaign strategy mirrored that of George W. Bush. She planned to have the nomination sewn up by Super Tuesday and she didn't plan for any other contingent, thus she was taken by surprise when she didn't win and had to continue - much to her dismay - especially when she was in the red going into April. Much of the cash she raised in February - $35M - had to be used for the General election. Only $11M could be used for the primaries. I think in many cases she's a walking contradiction. She advocated a health care plan where coverage would be mandated and wages would be garnished while at the same time, her campaign was two months in arrears (nearly $300K) with their own staffers' health care premiums. Saying one thing while doing another is what we’re trying to change.
Consistent message: Here are Hillary Clinton’s campaign slogans that she’s used since declaring her candidacy:
Let the conversation begin - Big Challenges, Real Solutions - Renewing the Promise of America - In to win - Working for change, working for you - Strength and Experience - The Hillary I know - The Change we need - Strength and experience to make change happen - Ready for change, ready to lead.
Here’s Barack Obama’s: Change we can believe in
With the exception of the occasional chants of “Yes We Can” and “All fired up – and ready to go,” he’s not changed his message. He’s been about change since he began. He had a message and he’s stuck to it. He’s been consistent about that. She goes for what sells. In fact, she started talking about change sometime in January or February (I think January) after he won Iowa. Management Style: This one will be tough. Obama’s run a tight ship so far and communication has been consistent and good. He still has his same advisors, campaign strategists, etc. Everyone in his camp agrees on the message and is working hard to get it out.
Clinton is on her third strategist. There’s a lot of in-fighting. She also has campaign managers and strategists – and surrogates – who directly contradict what she’s advocating.
* Mark Penn – Strategist until recently – works for a consulting company that tried to advocate a free trade deal with Colombia – that Clinton spoke out against
* Bill Clinton – Supported NAFTA, supports CAFTA – Clinton (now) is speaking out against both of them. This man would have her ear during the entire presidency and others in the White House would also go to him for advice as all presidents and presidential staffs do at one time or another of former presidents. He would be much more readily available day in and day out. I know their views differ on other issues, but I can’t find them at the moment so I’ll leave it at that.
* Patty Solis-Doyle – chosen to run a national campaign – originally – with no previous experience of running anything that big. She was fired after Super Tuesday.
* Penn, Williams, Solis-Doyle often disagreed on a variety of issues, hence the strategic shortfalls.
Who’s the boss? While in the White House, because others would try to seek the advice of a former president, (because he has experience) it would be difficult (at first anyway) to establish a respect for the proper hierarchy. There’s never been a former president living in the White House before. Granted, once Hillary Clinton sat them down and told them to ship up or ship out, they’d be ok, but she shouldn’t have to do that and I fear she would.
Experience: Hillary Clinton was elected into office in 2000. She’s in her 8th year of being a senator. She claims she has experience. She claims she helped broker a peace deal in N. Ireland. She was not at the table – Mitchell and others confirm this. Bosnia – Borders had just opened – prior to her arrival. Health Care – she tried. She held secret meetings with only some of the parties involved and didn’t accomplish anything she set out to do except make it more well-known that there was a health care crisis in America. Bush has done nothing to advance this issue, in fact, he’s gone backwards, but that’s another story.
Experience as a First Lady doesn’t not equate to experience brokering peace deals, or opening borders so refugees can get to safety, or setting up trade agreements…
Barack Obama was in the Illinois senate for about 8 years. He was first elected in 1996. He’s served in the U.S. Senate since 2004. (Well, elected in 2004, so he’s in his 4th year) While in the state legislature, he worked to improve health care for the children of Illinois by working with all parties – Dems, Reps, Insurance companies, Medical professionals, etc – not just those who agreed with him. He plans to do the same on a national level. While in the Senate, he’s worked with Sen. Dick Lugar to help dismantle nuclear weapons stashes (not the right word, sorry) in former Soviet Republics. He’s worked to improve ethics legislation…I don’t have exact details on this one, sorry, and has served in the Foreign Relations committee. Clinton is on the Armed Services committee. (for details – hit up their senate site)
Obama actually has more experience as an elected official. He’s turned down the idea of adding earmarks to pending legislation. Clinton has just requested over $2B in earmarks. He doesn’t accept month from Washington PACs or Lobbyists. Clinton does.
In fact, one supporter made a $100 donation. When you donate, you have to type in your company name and type of business. Because she worked for a lobbying firm, the campaign actually returned the money stating they couldn’t accept it. In 1996, when he ran for State Senate, he accepted money from State lobbying firms. There was an ad out stating otherwise, but since he’s run for the U.S. Senate, he has not accepted any money from Washington lobbyists.
Experience is important, but I don’t know of a single 1st term U.S. President who’s ever had experience running an entire nation before. If they had, they probably wouldn’t be eligible to be president. What is needed is this: Intelligence (i.e. the smart kind, Bush clearly missed the handouts for this one), good judgment, the ability to gather all information and make an informed decision as opposed to deciding before running that you’d like to invade Iraq and then gathering data to support your plans, and you need to surround yourself with good advisors. It’s the judgment and willingness to listen to more than one side of a situation that is the most important. Barack Obama has these good qualities I’ve just described. He’ll be fair and invite both sides in the discussion. Granted – they may not always get what they want, but they’ll at least be at the table. Besides – the thinking and the experience in DC these days – clearly it’s not working. It’s said that Obama will most likely invite Republicans into his cabinet. Clinton might too – I’ve not heard one way or the other. Regardless – dodging bullets in Bosnia (and telling the story about 4-5 times) and hosting tea parties don’t count towards the experience claim.
Now – in Clinton’s defense: She’s done a heck of a lot for women. All First Ladies do, of course, but I think she took it to the next level and for that she should most definitely be commended. It is in THAT way that she helped in N. Ireland. While she wasn’t at the table to broker the deal, she did inspire the women of that (and many others) nation to take ownership of the problem themselves and take action in their own communities. She’s a great example of what women can do – much like Madeleine Albright, Condi Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Geraldine Ferraro, Shirley Chisolm, etc. All are amazing women in their own rights that give girls all over a glimpse of what is possible. Hillary Clinton should not be excluded from that list, to be sure.
Fundraising: Isn’t that what politics is all about? Obama has a goal of 1.5M donors to his campaign by tomorrow. He’s currently at 1,494,986, which means he’s picked up about 6,000 more donors today. Pretty cool! Clinton went broke a couple of times during her campaign and had to lend herself money. Obama pulls in money from average, every day people who donate in increments of $20, $50, $100.
Clinton has a lot of people who write checks for $2300 and therefore can’t donate again in the primary season. The money she raised in Feb, the extra $19M, if she doesn’t get the nomination, she has to give that back to them because it can only be used for the general election.
Obama has gobs more of the smaller donors who don’t max out in donations which means he can go back to them again and again and again if need be. Now this is pretty disgusting, but he’s raised over $235M for this campaign so far. Clinton has raised close to $200 or a little over. It’s insane how much money they’ve raised – but it’s primarily been from everyday people – at least on the Obama side. This is something the DNC doesn’t want to pass up – his fundraising ability – and most of it has been online. Heck – he has even worked with the founder of Facebook to set up a networking site on my.barackobama.com (yes – of course, I have a page – look for “RPCV Heather in CMH”). You can have friends, a blog, your own fundraising page, you can join groups, set up events, post a basic profile with picture, etc. It’s pretty cool, actually.
Grassroots Organizational Ability: Obama’s is beyond compare. It’s amazing. By joining the site and getting on Email groups, you can easily know what’s going on in any state. Right now folks all over the country are calling people in IN and NC tonight because you can do phone banking from your house. Basically, you go online and click on phone bank and it gives you a list of 20 names. These names are given to you only. It then has a tutorial with a script telling you what to say when and how to respond if they say Yes – or NO – or Undecided – or whatever. Basically, if you live in the middle of nowhere, can’t get to a city where there’s a campaign office, but still want to help, you can do that from your family room in your PJs. A lot of folks who are handicapped are helping in this manner. We’ve had postcard campaigns (Women for Obama has put this together), we’ve had letter and Email writing campaigns, etc. In PA alone, he had over 50+ campaign offices set up around the state. Clinton – not sure exactly how many, but she had a lot fewer, that I know. She didn’t have the money so he could open more and he could open them earlier. I think he has over 30 in Indiana and who knows how many in NC. Here’s the NC Page, though: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/nchome With all of those offices, and contacts and motivated volunteers – he already has an impressive network set up for the general election this fall. It’s the folks on the ground that will get it done for him.
Voter Registration Drives: Obama has drawn in a slew of new voters – 1st timers who are just now old enough to vote and 1st timers who haven’t gotten around to voting before. He’s inspiring people to get up off the couch, stop watching TV and reading internet stories, (though that’s a lot of fun in and of itself) and take action. He’s done more to add to the Democratic electorate than anyone has in years and years. This is a whole new generation of voters and active participants. I’m not sure how many would remain motivated should he not get the nomination. What’s exciting, is that he’s kicking off a 50-state registration drive this Saturday, May 10th. All over the country, people are going to be going door to door registering new voters – those who missed the primaries and those who weren’t old enough for the primary but will be for the general election. Some states don’t allow 17-year olds to vote in the primary – even if they’ll be 18 by the general election. Either PA or IN has that rule – I forget which. Anyway, clearly he’s planning ahead for the fall.
Religion and politics: Rev. Wright – what an ass. I gave him credit – and the benefit of the doubt – the first time around because he was speaking out. Even though I didn’t agree with him on some things, we do enjoy freedom of speech here. When he came out and attacked Obama personally – the one who could have totally raked him over the coals back in March – I lost respect for the guy. He’s done some fabulous things in Chicago, but that was a pain in the butt. But – Clinton’s pastor has praised Wright. Bill Clinton asked him to join him at a prayer breakfast after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke out. Of course, McCain’s pastor has allegedly denounced Catholicism and called it a false religion and PA Governor Ed Rendell gave lavish praises to Louis Farrakhan… Whatever.
The pastors – can they lower our taxes, end the war in Iraq or provide better job opportunities? No. Moving on…
The proposed Gas Tax reprieve: Again – from MSNBC First Read: Out of Gas: NBC's Ken Strickland reports Clinton's and McCain's separate proposals for suspending the gas tax this summer will very likely run out of gas shortly after hitting the Senate floor later this month. Because it takes 60 votes to pass any controversial bill in the Senate, McCain and Clinton will easily fall short. Democrats would loath to support virtually any proposal from the presumptive Republican nominee, and support for Clinton's measure is lukewarm among her own Democratic colleagues. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/05/983305.aspx
Sigh.
Trust: I don’t really trust Hillary Clinton. The way she’s run her campaign the last couple of months has been more of a race to win for the sake of winning rather to win out of a genuine desire to better the country. Seriously – she’s not hurting (none of the candidates are). She totally underestimated her opponent and has fought a long, hard battle, but one for which she wasn’t prepared. She talks about experience she doesn’t have (Already detailed above), she talked of dodging sniper fire and then had the temerity to claim she misspoke because she was *sleep-deprived*. Using that as an excuse is more worrisome to me than a few lies because she’s looking to become the President of the United States of America – probably the most stressful job on the planet…one in which she’ll be sleep-deprived for 4, possibly 8 years. If she misspeaks (on 4-5 separate occasions) with reporters because she’s sleep-deprived, what will she say to foreign dignitaries? THAT worries me. She cannot use that as an excuse – however true that might be.
Super delegates: I don’t feel they’ll overturn the will of the voters. Clinton picked one up today. Obama picked up 6. He’s now down by only about 15 or so on the super count.
MI & FL: MI – I think it should be a straight 50/50 split. Obama wasn’t on the ballot – it shouldn’t stand as is. FL – Clinton held three fundraisers in FL prior to their primary. That one – I don’t have a resolution for that. I do not think that voters are being disenfranchised, though. The voters of those states elected their politicians to speak for them. They just don’t like the decisions that were made and can therefore vote them back out of office in the fall. All Dems in FL, for example, voted in favor of moving up the primary election. These same officials are the ones who both made and agreed to the DNC primary rules. Our constitution speaks of the privilege of voting in the General Election, but says nothing of the primaries. The various parties are free to set up their own rules on how to select a candidate. Heck – if they want, they can just appoint someone. There’s nothing in the constitution to prevent them from doing that. Granted – we REALLY wouldn’t like that, but they’re allowed to do that.
Primary season: As it stands, the nominee is determined based on delegate count. Obama’s ahead. Mathematically, Clinton can’t catch up. There are pros and cons to the prolonged race. It’s great that every state is being visited by the candidates – except poor Guam – it was only by remote that the candidates visited. Man – they get gipped every time! The downside is that Clinton doesn’t have the ability to catch up and it’s getting a lot more negative – at this stage, both sides are guilty. At the onset, we were all thrilled that we had three great candidates. It’s gotten more negative and thus more divisive. I’m bitter. I think I’ll cling to C-Span now and…oh wait, sorry. Anyway…the Republicans are having a gay ol’ time with this, but that’s to be expected. I think, though, that regardless of what the polls say about not wanting to support the other should your preferred candidate not win the nomination…many of those folks will remember that they do NOT want a republican in office and will come back together. I truly believe that. I’d vote for Clinton (grumble grumble grumble…just kidding!), and I’m sure her supporters would vote for Obama. She’s already said in a speech / interview that she’d work her heart out to support him. It might be a bit tough at first, but I’m sure she’d be true to her word on that.
One last piece from MSNBC First Read: Obama summed up the case for his candidacy to an undecided voter at town hall in the Research Triangle area in North Carolina. Obama said, in part, that voters found him more trustworthy than his opponent, and he sought to argue that his biggest potential problems -- issues that could cause pause among some voters like his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright -- had all come out. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/05/983098.aspx
So…I’m sick of typing and you’re sick of reading. If all that didn’t convince you to vote for Barack Obama, this will. Vote for him…because I said so! You’ll vote for him and you’ll like it.
PORPIGLIA HAS SPOKEN!! (to the Obama fans - it's an old nickname. Don't ask.)
Thank you thank you – thank you very much! Heather
P.S. A couple of my friends chipped in – one Obama and one Clinton supporter. HMB From my friends (I asked for their help with your question) From Steve, an Obama supporter: 50-ish, African-American, Veteran, married to a veteran who just returned from Iraq, both work full time. Kids are all grown. 1. The NEI states Iran doesn't have Nuke aspirations--2. Iran has never invaded another country in a thousands years,3. Words like "I will obliterate Iran" is more of the same for the last 8 yrs.4. Experience in Gov't is over rated.. naive is a tag his opponents try to frame him as.- Look where all the EXPERIENCE of BUSH /MCCAIN has gotten us.5. Change is scary- it takes a slight leap of faith.
One supporter of Hillary said this: (She's 57, Not a college grad, lives with her partner and thus supports GLBT initiatives) The United States of America has been represented by a male president for over 200 years now. Many other countries have had a female head of state, but this has not been the case here. It is about time for this to change. Sandy
- - - respectfully, I have to disagree with the logic behind voting for someone simply because she's a woman, or because he's black or because he's a veteran - though the last option, to me, carries more weight than the first two. I strongly feel the entire person should be considered - not merely her gender, his race, or his military status.
WOO HOO! GOBAMA…GOBAMA…GOBAMA…
