socio-politics

So now there’s a group called PUMA (party unity my ass) that refuses to vote for Obama. That’s their choice, but using Hillary Clinton as a reason for doing this is absurd, insane and shows a monumental distance from reality.

These people that claim to be part of PUMA say that they refuse to unite either because the primaries were rigged or because they just hate Obama. They cite the disputed Florida and Michigan primaries and the readiness to declare Obama the nominee as evidence.

As for Michigan -

And as for Florida and Michigan (and RIP Tim Russert)

When it was looking like she would, without a doubt, be the democratic nominee, Clinton had no problem with Florida and Michigan. And when things started to shift towards Obama, she started to say how the DNC plotted against her and how our whole electoral system is ridiculous.

And as for the DNC favoring the “weaker candidate” Obama - you’re insane if you truly believe that the DNC would choose a weaker candidate. They care about winning the election in November, and they know more about the candidates than any of us ever will. They devote their lives to politics, and yes, that involves corruption, but they would not choose a weaker candidate and risk losing the election. The fact is, they know things that we do not.

Hillary Clinton tried to employ dirty politics, though she just is not good at it. She lies nonstop and has no definite agenda because her agenda changes with whatever polls say will be popular for her. The really funny thing about this is when she gets called out about her changes in opinion (I.E. her Iraq vote, her opinion on the FL and MI primaries), she sticks by her old opinion while still trying to maintain her new one (see http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/13/574097.aspx)

And she has the audacity to say that she is one with her supporters, and that they are all in the struggle together. It makes me feel bad for the PUMA members because they must be so desperate for change that they will believe anything that they hear, without incorporating any sort of logic. I’ve had many discussions with people that still support Clinton and, much like how Clinton handles any challenges, they refuse to acknowledge any of her contradictory statements. It is not possible to get them to justify her change of position on MI and FL, yet they still complain about how people were “disenfranchised”. They need the hope that Clinton provided them, though unfortunately, there would be no way that she could have followed through.

So many horrible things have also been exposed about the Clintons throughout this whole process. I do not believe that Bill was an incredible president, though he was undoubtedly one of the most brilliant politicians that we have had - Hillary however is not too intelligent. Bill tried to support her, though when somebody like Hillary has no capacity to justify her own actions, there is nothing that can be done. It wore on Bill, and resulted in some very uncharacteristic statements.

And Chelsea………….how could anybody believe somebody that refuses to answer any questions? It is obvious that she is just told what to say, and does not know enough about the issues/ can not justify what her mom says. And any of the speculation about her getting involved with politics just scares the hell out of me.

PUMA also strongly believes that the media was/is against Clinton. This is another belief that Clinton instilled. In the beginning, the media treated her as if she was entitled to the nomination, though when people actually began to vote and it became obvious that Obama had a strong chance, the media started to get behind Obama more. Clinton quickly stated that the media was sexist and was holding her back, and that they were always talking about Obama. As a result, whenever people heard the name Obama (regardless of the context), an alarm went off, though if they had listened to how many times they heard Clinton’s name mentioned, they would have found it to be equal. It was a smart strategy that was successful to a small extent, though unfortunately, it has had negative repercussions for the democratic party.

Hillary Clinton is a dirty politician that manipulated people’s minds to gain support. She focused on attacks, rather than substance, and avoided anything involving the actual issues. There were only a few topics that she readily talked about, and these were the topics that undeniably sound good i.e. universal health care. The rest of the time, she diverted her attention to attacks on Obama and fabrications about unseen forces preventing her from getting nominated.

As for the Puma members - they have shown themselves to be hypocrites and not knowledgeable on politics. Many say that they will be voting for McCain, and if that is true, then they are the most petty and shallow people in the country. They must not have any real values, because McCain and Hillary have very different ideologies that are not at all compatible. They let these fabricated grudges dictate their actions, and it puts so many questions into play about what Clinton’s intentions were. She may have known that she would be dividing the party like this, just for the sake of her own potential personal gains. Even more depressing is the probability of her taking advantage of the PUMA members so that she can help to pay off her $25 million debt.

I normally would not speak out so strongly about any group of people, though the effect that Clinton had says too many depressing things about the condition of our country and society to be able to reconcile it.

All there is to it is that Clinton was a weak candidate, and she lost. Obama has a definite agenda, and he gained the support of the democratic party. If that means losing the support from the kind of people that are in PUMA then so be it - they obviously do not subscribe to any of the values of liberalism anyway. Liberalism is about questioning what you hear, and initiating a conversation to see all views and to determine what could be best for more people. On the other hand, conservatism relies more on following a specific set of values. From that standpoint, it seems that the PUMA members are all closet conservatives anyway.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS