OK, technically it's not official until the convention in August, but today Clinton announced the end of her candidacy and endorsed Obama. She also asked her supporters to vote for him. I believe the official term is "called for party unity."
Or as I prefer, "end the tantrums about your favorite not winning and support the candidate that is closest to your views instead of allowing the polar opposite to get into office and destroy us all."
So let's hope we can get the same record voter turnout (or more!) in November and elect the Democratic ticket.
Hey, I even added Obama to my list of Facebook pages. And I still maintain he'd have to be stupid to pick anyone other than Clinton as his running mate. Want to talk party unity? Put the two candidates that drew out a record number of voters on the same ticket. It seems obvious to me. And I'm not the only one.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Official Nomination-age
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
While it's admirable to hope for party unity on these things, from what I've read online (which, I admit, the internet isn't really a solid cross-section of voters), a lot of people are really, really polarized on this one.
Many of the staunch pro-Clinton bloggers said they'd take her as VP as an insult, "like a woman getting passed up for a job in favor of the boss's favorite nephew", and such.
Many of them are talking about voting third-party just to "prove a point", as it were.
Do you really think people are going to come together on this one, or will stubbornness take the day?
I really think people are going to come together. Which I don't say to be "admirable," I say because that's what I believe.
To anyone who plans to vote third party out of tantrums or point-proving, all I have to say is that it's not going to help. It's akin voting for McCain. Yes, a two-party system sucks and the electoral college is an outdated and corrupt system, but people are still satisfied enough with the status quo that it's not going to change soon, so why throw your vote away to prove something?
From what I've seen, ~51% of Democrats favor Clinton as VP.
I agree, that voting to prove a point is a silly, wasted gesture. No one will notice, and the end result is the same thing as happened whenever Nader would run.
You're essentially handing a vote to the Republicans when you do that.
I've never really had a problem with the two-party system, we've had it for a very long time, and it's generally representative of the people.
Whenever anyone tries a third party ticket, most people ignore them. If that's not the will of the people, I don't know what is.
As far as the 51%, I was speaking of online. Not any polling of the person on the street, as it were.
Though, I don't know how likly Obama choosing Clinton is.
It's all academic to me, as I only observe elections, I never participate. I have my own reasons for that, and I won't buckle on them.
Post a Comment