digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at eyesonobama.com

An Olive Branch to Clinton Supporters

eyesonobama.com — No one should be faulted for supporting a strong, intelligent, capable woman who only lost her way. She lost it in her search for her real voice amid comparisons to her husband, surrounded by out-of-bounds suggestions about her gender and mired in a campaign team stuck in the campaign style of the 80s and 90s.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • redcolumbine, on 05/19/2008, -4/+17I have no problem with her supporters. Like our troops, they were lied to, and did what they thought was right for the country. But Senator Clinton herself is dishonest.
    • voxtarri, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3There's also that large chunk of Clinton supporters who are voting for her just because she is a woman. I have only met three Clinton supporters, but all three of them were female and all three couldn't tell me a single thing about Clinton's campaign, just that "we need a woman in office and that is why I am voting for her"
      That type of supporter I definitely have a problem with.
      • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2OK, everyone. From now on whenver you say a comment that is either anti-Hillary or anti-Obama, don't immediately assume who the poster really supports.

        Voxtarri clearly doesn't like Clinton...but that doesn't imply Obama-allegiance either. In this case, you have a ***Ron Paul*** supporter. (Check the user profile.)

        I really encourage libertarian and independent supporters to speak their mind. But in this case (especially with the topic of this article) it's easy for a Clinton supporter to think that this is an Obama supporter making anti-Clinton remarks. In the case of some of the posters (w/ similar issues) to this article, I've encouraged them to at least provide the context of stating their true bias.

        There's tons of this ***** going on.
        I encourage you all to check it out.
  • transcendsmas, on 05/19/2008, -5/+7The party will heal! We always heal after a primary is over. It' difficult to lose and be gracious about it. Obama supporters must take the high road and either ignore negative comments on blogs or respond politely with facts and empathy.
    • crichton101, on 05/20/2008, -3/+3It's not difficult to lose graciously, unless you have an ego and are self centered, then yes it can be very difficult.
  • bicyclethief, on 05/20/2008, -4/+4I'm gonna sound like a ***** but...I shouldn't have to placate the Clinton supporters. If they don't realize that these primaries means nothing unless we win the general election, then they're being recklessly short-sighted.
    • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3Well, I'm not gonna say you sound like a *****.

      But you do sound short-sighted at this point in time. (Obama *will* need Clinton supporters in November.)
      You also sound like you may have taken this primary a little personally (even though you kind of imply that it is Clinton's supporters who may be acting that way.)

      Loosen up. Let it roll off your shoulders. There's plenty of posters who are writing divisive posts under the guise of being a supporter of either HRC or BO. I'm not at all saying that you're one of them. But please think about how your voice sounds en masse.
      • bicyclethief, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2Did you read my comment at all?

        Who said Obama doesn't need Clinton's supporters?

        My comment was directed at exactly those that have taken this primary too personally.

        My only point was that Democrats need to keep their eyes on the prize-- the real prize of the White House and not the nomination.
        • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1I agree that we all need to keep our eye on the prize...and yes, I read your first (and second) comment completely.

          Your first comment belittles Clinton supporters....ie--saying you shouldn't have to 'placate' Clinton supporters and calling *them* 'recklessly shortsighted'.

          I'm simply holding a mirror out to say that your tone sounds like maybe you're the one who has hurt feelings--and maybe you're the one who's not able to keep their eye on the prize.

          My intention is not to piss you--or anyone--off. Just saying that this is how I read the tone of your initial comment.

          I'm glad that you see that Obama needs Clinton supporters. ...If you're going to direct further comments to "those that have taken this primary too personally", then please just think about toning it down. ...Or I fear your comments will not be heard in the positive light that you apparently intend.
        • bicyclethief, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2I think in your lovey-dovey, conciliatory mode, you've become far too sensitive. I'm all for unity, but this is politics, not Montessori school.

          Contrary to what you think, I am not belittling Clinton supporters (at least in this instance). And I don't call all Clinton supporters "recklessly short-sighted." Only the ones who "don't realize that these primaries means nothing unless we win the general election." But I would extend this to all Democrats alike.

      • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Well, I'm laughing my ass off at being called 'lovey dovey'. (Laughing so hard I can't even use acronymns.)

        You're admitting to the belittling tone you've taken towards Clinton supporters...You've now simply changed your response to "I only meant to be belittling towards *some* Clinton supporters.

        There's *nothing* more short-sighted than for you to say that Obama supporters can afford to belittle one single voter out there. I think that Al Gore can speak to the importance of every single voter. (No, that's not the entire issue with Gore's campaign--but even a few hundred voters who didn't go to Nader would've made the difference.)

        As I said before, please tone it down.
        I think you really do mean well.
        Good luck to you.
        • bicyclethief, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Me: I am not belittling Clinton supporters
          You: You're admitting to the belittling tone you've taken towards Clinton supporters

          Do you often just see what you want to see?
  • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -7/+2Sorry the only thing I'll be extending isn't an olive branch. Clinton's minions sicken me.
    • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3Here's a revealing quote from whataboutdave (via his comments section):

      "There is no God. There is only Ron Paul."

      Go play in your own sandbox.
      Dems don't you need stirring our pot.
      • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1So for holding some libertarian beliefs I forfeit my voice in American politics? "Democratic Party" indeed.

        Next time I'd appreciate my comments being taken in context.
        • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Sure thing, just *provide* the context!

          I won't digg you down if you do.

          (It was your lack of context that made me digg you down. Didn't want your comment to be miscontstrued with an Obama supporter's comment.)

          I actually respect your libertarian beliefs and do NOT want you to forfeit your voice. (I am currently registered as as a Dem, but most years I register as an independent...and over the yrs, I've voted for Independent Party and Green Party candidates--as well as both Dem and GOP.)

          I'm all about the independent voice--amd am committed to using my own voice towards civility. And 'context' is a great beginning.
        • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Actually I am likely to vote for Obama in the general election (that is unless he takes Clinton as his VP or makes some major policy statement I disagree with). I like his tone and most of his policies outside of economic matters. He's far from perfect, but McCain has some troubling tendencies recently.

          So, yeah, that makes me an Obama supporter. Nothing to misconstrue.
        • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Glad to hear you're supporting Obama in the fall. In that case, I'd encourage you (and all of us--myself included) to carefully consider the tone of any Clinton comments you make.

          You can check my profile and see that I've been pro-Obama this whole campaign. But from now on (in the interest in winning this fall), I'm digging down any Clinton comments that have a nasty tone.

          Here's hoping the Bush era is over. Move over, McC.
  • Shelter22, on 05/20/2008, -5/+7$26.99 for a t-shirt? ***** you, die.
  • wild, on 05/20/2008, -5/+7I finally figured out Eyes On Obama's gameplan.

    1.) Find something popular on Digg (Obama)
    2.) Write positive stuff about popular subject ripped from other websites (CNN, Huff Post)
    3.) Submit to Digg (And then give it a few initial bumps to assure front page)
    4.) Sell t-shirts and host ads
    .......
    5.) Profit!

    For the love of Digg, can we realize this site is simply SPAM and start burying their stuff? I am a strong Obama supporter, but these guys are just gaming for profits. Thats why a t-shirt is the picture for every single article.

    They probably don't even care about Obama. Its just for the cash.
    • wild, on 05/20/2008, -4/+1I do have a clue how much they cost. I design them everyday. (Actually, sites with more visitors a month, but I digress.)

      If they want to really show a dedication, they can use photos that aren't t-shirts for their stories. And come up with original material. Its clear they are gaming digg.
  • insomniacal, on 05/20/2008, -5/+2"No one should be faulted for supporting a strong, intelligent, capable woman who only lost her way."

    This line is so contrary to everything I heard from Obama supporters on Clinton that I refuse to read further. Venal hypocrites. Time to pay the piper.
    • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -3/+5Well, you're neither an Obama OR a Clinton supporter.

      So shut the hell up. Go play somewhere else.
  • wynja, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6Anyone foolish enough to believe Hillary's lies after she sold out to the Health Care Industry on her single defining position during Bill's presidency should have their right to vote revoked.
    PS I voted for Ron Paul in the primaries, so don't even start with me about being a Obama supporter.
    • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -2/+4Thanks for identifying yourself as a Paul supporter--and not trying to pretend you were an Obama supporter.

      I agree (for the most part) with your criticism about the healthcare issue. But I strongly disagree with the language about having Clinton supporters lose their right to vote. Really, truly sensational and divisive.

      Still, I didn't dig you down, as my way of thanking you for identifying yourself. Peace.
      • wynja, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2My point is stupidity should not be rewarded with voting rights. You should have to pass a basic civics test before your allowed to vote. Not every idiots opinion should matter. If people informed themselves before voting, then this country wouldn't be in the ***** it's in today.
  • Radigg, on 05/20/2008, -3/+4some of her more extreme supporters are now blaming Obama for her failure, sexism has been mentioned!
    • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2Dude, why stir the pot?

      Your profile says that you're from Great Britain and are a fan of Mike Gravel. Your comment section simply reveals that you really dislike Hillary.

      ....So why do you care about how supporters of Hillary and Obama get along?
      ...And if you do care, why would try to get Obama supporters POd about something 'extreme Hillary supporters' would bring up?
      • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2"Why stir the pot?"
        How new are you to politics? This isn't badminton over afternoon tea.

        The office of the US President is a powerful one and its actions impact people all over the world. Radigg was totally within his rights to express an opinion over something he obviously cares about. Free speech FTW.

        Hillary has been far from a gracious loser and I resent the notion that Obama supporters somehow have a duty to make nice with her and her supporters.
        • jforjools, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2Am I new to politics?
          I'm 42yo and am a precinct chair in MN.

          We all have the right to free speech.

          I am using my free speech (at times) to point out people's hidden agendas. In this case I was pointing out that Radigg may or may not have one....and was hoping to possibly hear back from him.

          In the case of yourself, whataboutdave (a Ron Paul supporter), you are apparently ALL ABOUT 'stirring the pot'. Your comment on this article (5th one posted) was dugg down. Why? Must be free speech, I guess?

        • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2I never asked how old you are. I asked about your familiarity with the political game. I know this may come as a shock, but you're not the arbiter of true Obama support.

          Hidden agendas? Hardly.
          Radigg and I are upfront about our candidates of choice. I'm a moderate libertarian who will likely vote for Obama. I strongly oppose Clinton's candidacy.

          So this really amounts to you demanding that I politely shut up and fall in line. That's not going to happen. I don't have to be a middle aged Democratic precinct leader to support Obama and I certainly won't ask permission to express myself. I think Hillary's campaign has played to the lowest common denominator and I don't need to pretend to like her supporters or her populist platform.

          If Obama is going to win in November he will need people like me more than he will people like you. You see, you'll vote for the Dem no matter what. I like a lot of what he's saying but I'm not a mindless partisan footsoldier. Obama's "new politics" has a place for you, but it has a place for me as well. Deal with it.
  • cjshamrock, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3I don't know why Clinton supporters have to hate Obama and vice-versa. They're both democrats, but they are very different people.

    I think one of the problems is that Clinton has just become desperate and attacked Obama too aggressively, even more so than Republicans usually do

    Hillary should make peace with Obama and get out while she's still on a high note. Attacking Obama now will backfire. Resistance is futile.
  • paigeoneill, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2Great story. I'd love to see a woman president, but it is hard to argue with the Obama wave sweeping the nation.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.