This election a lot is at stake. Barack Obama is a much better candidate than John Kerry. But if I could go back in time and ensure Kerry won over Bush, I would in a hearbeat. This election cycle the stakes are just as high, and McCain just as damaging an alternative. That didn’t stop the humbly named myiq2xu at The Confluence from writing:
Despite what the media claims, Obama is and has been the “establishment” candidate.
Let’s get a few things clear right off the bat. Barack Obama is an establisment candidate, and so was Hillary Clinton. Pointing this out, from the Clinton side, is glaringly selective blindness on their hypocritical part.
This is why the Democratic leadership selected Barack Obama to be the nominee, in opposition to the will of the majority of the Democratic Party. This is why the corporatist-owned media has pushed Obama’s candidacy and shrilly opposed Hillary. Obama is one of them, while Hillary is not.
OK this one just hurts. Hillary isn’t part of the club? Really? Hillary Clinton is a ragged outsider representing liberals? Next to John Edwards she looked like Holy Joe Liberman standing next to Ted Kennedy.
But they miscalculated. They underestimated Hillary, and they underestimated us. They didn’t expect her to fight so well or so long. They didn’t expect her to win our loyalty, respect and love. They didn’t expect her to inspire us to rise in opposition to them.
They didn’t expect PUMA
Why would the establishment expect people to put attacking one establishment candidate in favor of another establishment candidate over winning against the Republican? Its insane! That’s hardly a call to glory.
Also, Hillary Clinton is not fighting anymore. She’s thrown in the towel after a long and venomous fight that drew blood on both sides.
Frankly as an Edwards supporter turned Obama supporter, I’m not entirely satisfied with the way Hillary Clinton lost. I think the popular vote argument is a legitimate and worrying one. But to actively work to sabotage the Democratic Presidential campaign speaks loudly and lowly of one’s principles.
When John McCain (another establishment candidate, noticing a pattern here?) is in office, we’ll joing together once again to lament the regression of our country and wonder how the Democrats snatched defeat from the jaws of victory once again. We’ll sympathize with the soldiers who will be sent to die, the women denied their right to choose, and the millions of Americans without health insurance. And we’ll do so with the same self righteous inefficacy that left us defeated in 2004.
Or we can swallow our differences for now and fight to make sure John McCain loses and Barack Obama is the next President of the United States. Then we pour our effort in concert with sympathetic Independents and Republicans into the following electoral reforms:
- No more delegates. Period. The popular vote all the way.
- Do away with state primaries. Let’s have one national primary for all parties.
- Shorter election periods, let’s take a lesson from the UK, a month for the primary season, and a month for the general.
- Voter-verifiable paper trails. If our elections are easy to tamper with, how can we have any trust in our right to vote?
- Instant run-off voting + mandatory minimums. For example, the vote will have to run again if no candidate garners more than 50% of the vote.
It would be a start. But if we are busy fighting back against a conservative President with the upper ground, we’ll be hard pressed to avoid regression on major social, political and economic issues. Making progress would be a whole lot easier if we didn’t have to fight an uphill battle while watching our backs.