As good as It gets (crazyhecallsme) wrote,
As good as It gets
crazyhecallsme

  • Mood:

Haterade

I don't know what it is, but Hillary supporters are a bunch of haters. Two friends have tried to convert me to Team Hillary. They did a terrible job at it.

First, when they approached the topic, they insulted my intelligence (which immediately gave me the right to ignore what they said next). Both Hillary supporters insinuated that I hadn't put any thought behind my decision, because one demanded that I list the reasons I supported him, another insinuated that I was just dazzled by his speeches (I've never actually heard any full speeches of his). Instead of talking up what's so great about Hillary, and why they are supporting her, they just bash Obama. Which is kind of ineffective, since no one has anything truly damaging on him.

The two candidates are so similar in how they vote, what they believe, and what they propose, it is hard to differentiate between who's the best based on the usual issues--(Hillary has yet to convince me that she's got much of this experience that she keeps harping on). So given that they share only slight differences you do have to make a judgment call based on personal preference.

Despite their similarity on the issues, both Hillary and Barack are very different people, and each would have different strengths and weaknesses as a leader. Despite all her strengths, I don't like how Hillary plays the game. She's way too macho and rigid, and she fights dirty. Obama seems much more flexible, willing to work with people and talk issues out, instead of taking a stance and aggressively sticking to it. Maureen Dowd (whose writing I occasionally read, but don't really like) wrote an article stating that his leadership style was very feminine, and hers more masculine.

"The bullying and bellicosity of the Bush administration have left many Americans exhausted and yearning for a more nurturing and inclusive style. Sixteen years of politicians in Washington clashing in epic if not always essential battle through culture wars, the right-wing war against the Clintons, the war-without-end on terror, and the war-with-no-end-in-sight in Iraq have spawned a desire for peace and pragmatism."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24dowd.html?scp=3&sq=maureen+dowd&st=nyt

In addition, Barack seems completely unflappable and genuinely principled (although I don't think one should ever fully trust a person egotistical and power hungry enough to think that they can run one of the most powerful nations in the world). On the other hand, I see why people like Hillary. She's a hard worker, extremely bright, strong, sure of herself, and able to get what she wants. But I personally appreciate a much less aggressive approach to conflict and don't think this tough, macho approach has been working out so well for America, (re: war on terror).

Also, another thing that worries me are allegations that Hillary's campaign is suffering because she chose employees who were loyal as opposed to competent, (Bush fuck up #1--i.e. FEMA / Justice department) and because she doggedly stood by a failing campaign tactic (Bush fuck up #2 i.e. War on Terror / Donald Rumsfeld)

Actually, the day of the primary I resolved to vote for the person I most agreed with, Mike Gravel. A man who was against wars, for abortion and gay marriage, has no allegiance to corporations, and all kinds of other awesome liberal things. Hillary and Barack are cool, and everything, but I stand to the left of them. Unfortunately, Gravel wasn't on the New York ballot. So I voted for the black guy.

And I'll leave you with a quote from Gravel:
"Wars do not solve problems, they merely beget other wars. That's the tragedy of history... Iraq is not a problem. The problem is that we will go into another war, in part because the military-industrial complex needs conflict to justify production. The underlying structure that permits this to go forward is this attitude of American imperialism. We have a military presence in 130 countries and 700 military bases around the world. If Americans understood this, they wouldn't be for it. They don't want to to be the world's policemen- not when we have an educational system that is shameful, a health system that is shameful and a crumbling infrastructure. What we're doing is following the pattern of prior empires, particularly the Spanish empire who became the sword-makers to the world and were lost in the fog of history."
http://jezebel.com/351252/mike-gravel-the-candidate-you-didnt-know-you-wanted-and-probably-didnt-vote-for
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

  • 0 comments