Geraldine Ferraro (Clinton campaign) v. Obama campaign

[Michael Z]

Hillary Clinton and her campaign are single-handily destroying the Democrats

Why? Geraldine speaks for herself, not Senator Clinton, or her supporters, any more than Louis Farrakhan speaks for Senator Obama or his supporters.

This type of issue is, and will continue to be a direct result of her staying in the race when she can't win pledged delegates and it's highly unlikely she'll win the popular. She's selfish and destroying the party making it easy pickens for McCain. She should drop out gracefully but that would be expecting too much of her

Well, to be fair, she still has a mathematical chance of winning the nomination (albeit a very VERY slight one) so I don't think she should just "drop out", and it would be unreasonable to demand as much of her. That said, some of her campaign tactics aren't exactly helping the unity of the party - this is definitely turning out to be the most divisive primary season since the Republicans in 76 (there's that comparison again).

[Aizen]

Hillary Clinton and her campaign are single-handily destroying the Democrats

Why? Geraldine speaks for herself, not Senator Clinton, or her supporters, any more than Louis Farrakhan speaks for Senator Obama or his supporters.

This type of issue is, and will continue to be a direct result of her staying in the race when she can't win pledged delegates and it's highly unlikely she'll win the popular. She's selfish and destroying the party making it easy pickens for McCain. She should drop out gracefully but that would be expecting too much of her

Well, to be fair, she still has a mathematical chance of winning the nomination (albeit a very VERY slight one) so I don't think she should just "drop out", and it would be unreasonable to demand as much of her. That said, some of her campaign tactics aren't exactly helping the unity of the party - this is definitely turning out to be the most divisive primary season since the Republicans in 76 (there's that comparison again).

The only way to win the nomination for her is through underhanded means at this point which is still very possible but it would cause half the party to revolt. I know I would drive 25 minutes over to Denver and protest. The problem is the campaign is turning uglier by the day, mostly her fault too. Her tactic is to win by any means possible then fix the damage that's been done. McCain is just sitting back sipping his wine glass and laughing. Hillary is doing all the Republican's work for them.

[Jake]

More amusement...  What do you think?

Ignoring anything political about it, she's completely correct. Obama would not be winning these primary contests with a coalition of students, upper income professionals, and independent/GOP crossovers. If he was a white guy, Clinton would be getting the lions share of minority votes.

For everything else, lol. It just keeps getting better.

[ukchris82]

Breaking: Ferraro steps down
Posted: 05:05 PM ET
(CNN) – Geraldine Ferraro has stepped down from her role as a member of Hillary Clinton's finance committee.

In a letter to Clinton obtained by CNN's Suzanne Malveaux, Ferraro said she is stepping down so, "I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign."

Full letter:

Dear Hillary –

I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign.

The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you.

I won't let that happen.

Thank you for everything you have done and continue to do to make this a better world for my children and grandchildren.

You have my deep admiration and respect.

Gerry

[phk]

This is what happens when you have only "token" candidates running for the same party's nomination for president.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Verily]

At least she's stepping down, though it's clear she's going to continue being a very vocal moron.

[Beet]

This is what happens when you have only "token" candidates running for the same party's nomination for president.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ask Carol Moseley-Braun how far being a "token" candidate will get you in a Dem primary

Obama and Hillary are successful because they both have huge strengths, in message for the former, in blue collar loyalty for the latter.

I really think that about 99.9% of the people who heard about Ferraro's comments and other potentially racially insensitive things have only heard about them because Obama's supporters and the media made huge stinks about them. IIRC Ferraro made similar comments weeks ago (and so have many other people), but nobody cared, nor should they.

[elcorazon]

By the way, Ferraro is certainly correct about how if you ever try to correct the Obama campaign, it is apparently a hint that you are a racist.

kinda reminds me of people who criticize our current regime labelled as anti-American or unpatriotic, particularly when criticizing policies relating to wars and foreign policy.

[Sam Spade]

More amusement...  What do you think?

Ignoring anything political about it, she's completely correct. Obama would not be winning these primary contests with a coalition of students, upper income professionals, and independent/GOP crossovers. If he was a white guy, Clinton would be getting the lions share of minority votes.

For everything else, lol. It just keeps getting better.

Well, the GOP crossovers won't help him in most of the upcoming races, but you're right.

Moreover, now that Ferraro's resigned, I will admit as well that she's absolutely correct, factually.  And the Obama campaign is using this for racial purposes.

I'll make a prediction now, if anyone wants to hold me to it, that's fine, that if Barack Obama is elected President, he'll set race relations in this country back 30 years.  Some people might be happy to see it, not me.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

I think Ferraro's comments are a turning point in this campaign.  It marks the beginning of what is now officially a presidential campaign that is going to be dominated by a racial subtext.

[Keystone Phil]

I am by no means a fan of Ferraro but it is such a shame that a woman who has been a fighter for civil rights in bother her public and private life is being labeled a racist but the Obama fanatics. Such a pity.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

I am by no means a fan of Ferraro but it is such a shame that a woman who has been a fighter for civil rights in bother her public and private life is being labeled a racist but the Obama fanatics. Such a pity.

When she says completey moronic things like "the reason why they hate me is because I'm white!!!!!", then she may not be a racist, but she certainly exhibits poor judgement and choice of words. 

[Mr. Morden]

Moreover, now that Ferraro's resigned, I will admit as well that she's absolutely correct, factually.

I agree with you that she's "factually correct" in saying that Obama wouldn't be in the position he's in if he was white.  *But*, at a certain level, the point is kind of trivial.....as I agree with Mickey Kaus that "by the time any politician gets to the stratopsheric level of presidential contender, he or she has almost certainly had some morally arbitrary lucky breaks (like being a black, or an Italian, or a Bush, or just being in the right place at the right time".  So I'm not sure whether there's anything particularly profound about teasing out one particular attribute of a presidential candidate that's helped him get to where he is (and one that might have hurt a similar politician in different circumstances).

Of course, there's the separate question of whether every "factually correct" statement should be within the bounds of polite discourse.  Is it better that we just live with the taboo that, while it's OK to argue against affirmative action in the abstract, it's "insensitive" to publicly call out specific people and say that they wouldn't be where they are if it wasn't for their race?  Probably, yeah.

[Sam Spade]

Moreover, now that Ferraro's resigned, I will admit as well that she's absolutely correct, factually.

I agree with you that she's "factually correct" in saying that Obama wouldn't be in the position he's in if he was white.  *But*, at a certain level, the point is kind of trivial.....as I agree with Mickey Kaus that "by the time any politician gets to the stratopsheric level of presidential contender, he or she has almost certainly had some morally arbitrary lucky breaks (like being a black, or an Italian, or a Bush, or just being in the right place at the right time".  So I'm not sure whether there's anything particularly profound about teasing out one particular attribute of a presidential candidate that's helped him get to where he is (and one that might have hurt a similar politician in different circumstances).

When you're winning 90% of the black vote against the wife of the "first black President", it certainly is an arbitrary break.  But the fact that you're doing it because you're black is simply true - there's no opinion there, it's not racism, it's fact.  He would have gotten massacred by Clinton in Mississippi or any other Deep South state were he not black.

And the simple fact is that Barack Obama would have already lost the nomination were he a white man.  He would have made no inroads into Clinton's lower income female base or Hispanics.  The white male vote and latte liberals are simply not great enough.  And she would be winning, about 65-70% of the blacks.  It's a killer alliance - see Gary Hart.

[Mr. Morden]

Sam, I agree with you.  He wouldn't be winning if he was white.  My point was that every one of the presidential candidates is where they are in part because of arbitrary factors that they had no control over (e.g., HRC had no way of knowing that she was marrying a future president, and she wouldn't be where she is today if she hadn't accepted Bill's marriage proposal).

[Verily]

Moreover, now that Ferraro's resigned, I will admit as well that she's absolutely correct, factually.

I agree with you that she's "factually correct" in saying that Obama wouldn't be in the position he's in if he was white.  *But*, at a certain level, the point is kind of trivial.....as I agree with Mickey Kaus that "by the time any politician gets to the stratopsheric level of presidential contender, he or she has almost certainly had some morally arbitrary lucky breaks (like being a black, or an Italian, or a Bush, or just being in the right place at the right time".  So I'm not sure whether there's anything particularly profound about teasing out one particular attribute of a presidential candidate that's helped him get to where he is (and one that might have hurt a similar politician in different circumstances).

When you're winning 90% of the black vote against the wife of the "first black President", it certainly is an arbitrary break.  But the fact that you're doing it because you're black is simply true - there's no opinion there, it's not racism, it's fact.  He would have gotten massacred by Clinton in Mississippi or any other Deep South state were he not black.

And the simple fact is that Barack Obama would have already lost the nomination were he a white man.  He would have made no inroads into Clinton's lower income female base or Hispanics.  The white male vote and latte liberals are simply not great enough.  And she would be winning, about 65-70% of the blacks.  It's a killer alliance - see Gary Hart.

We could say the same thing about Hillary Clinton: she's doing well because she's Bill's wife. Does that add anything to the dialogue? No, not really, but it adds no less than that Obama is black. The working class white vote wouldn't rally behind her if she weren't his wife, the elderly vote wouldn't rally behind her, etc. The same goes for her gender: there would be no "female vote" for Clinton if she were a man, and the race would be over.

If we're going to assume neither candidate has any "advantages", anything that makes them different people, then we have to step back to John Doe and  Richard Roe running against each other with the same platforms and speeches as the current candidates but otherwise wholly generic: white, male, same age, same political service, etc.

It is for this reason that identifying a specific "cause" for a politician's success is nothing short of moronic.

[Jake]

If Hillary and Obama were both white male candidates, assuming they held the same positions and same history (ignoring the obvious unrealisticness with Bill Clinton), Hillary would be wiping the floor with him. His base would be college kids and professionals, "her" base would be working classers and minorities, and she wouldn't be getting hurt by white males. Barack Obama would never be competitive in a Democratic primary if he was not Black, Hillary would be if she was not a woman.

[Mr. Morden]

If Hillary and Obama were both white male candidates, assuming they held the same positions and same history (ignoring the obvious unrealisticness with Bill Clinton), Hillary would be wiping the floor with him. His base would be college kids and professionals, "her" base would be working classers and minorities, and she wouldn't be getting hurt by white males. Barack Obama would never be competitive in a Democratic primary if he was not Black, Hillary would be if she was not a woman.

I don't know.  If HRC was a man, wouldn't "she" basically be John Edwards circa 2004?  And might not a "white Obama" be sort of like Howard Dean circa 2004 (except with less experience, but with a more competent campaign and without so many gaffes)?  It's worth noting that Howard Dean could have won the nomination in 2004 if he hadn't made so many gaffes and had run a more competent campaign.  It's entirely possible that a "white Obama" in 2008 could have stood out from the pack (because of his opposition to the initial invasion of Iraq) in a way that a "male Hillary Clinton" couldn't have.

[WalterMitty]

im glad ferraro is fighting back.

im sick to my stomach with all of these damned little hand wringers crying 'racism!' everytime obama is criticized.

if you all believe that young white senator john smith of illinois, 3 years removed from the state legislature, where he piled up a ton of present votes.  fresh off of his big senate victory against that political goliath known as alan keyes....would be a front runner for the presidential nomination...you are either 1. drinking a hell of a lot of kool aid...or 2. in complete denial.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

im glad ferraro is fighting back.

im sick to my stomach with all of these damned little hand wringers crying 'racism!' everytime obama is criticized.

if you all believe that young white senator john smith of illinois, 3 years removed from the state legislature, where he piled up a ton of present votes.  fresh off of his big senate victory against that political goliath known as alan keyes....would be a front runner for the presidential nomination...you are either 1. drinking a hell of a lot of kool aid...or 2. in complete denial.

Uh, Walter, she resigned her post.      http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080312/ap_on_el_pr/obama_ferraro

[WalterMitty]

im glad ferraro is fighting back.

im sick to my stomach with all of these damned little hand wringers crying 'racism!' everytime obama is criticized.

if you all believe that young white senator john smith of illinois, 3 years removed from the state legislature, where he piled up a ton of present votes.  fresh off of his big senate victory against that political goliath known as alan keyes....would be a front runner for the presidential nomination...you are either 1. drinking a hell of a lot of kool aid...or 2. in complete denial.

Uh, Walter, she resigned her post.      http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080312/ap_on_el_pr/obama_ferraro

have you seen her media appearances?  she is doing a good job of fighting back.

the clinton campaign needs more of that.

theyve let those bastards holler 'racism' for months.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

im glad ferraro is fighting back.

im sick to my stomach with all of these damned little hand wringers crying 'racism!' everytime obama is criticized.

if you all believe that young white senator john smith of illinois, 3 years removed from the state legislature, where he piled up a ton of present votes.  fresh off of his big senate victory against that political goliath known as alan keyes....would be a front runner for the presidential nomination...you are either 1. drinking a hell of a lot of kool aid...or 2. in complete denial.

Uh, Walter, she resigned her post.      http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080312/ap_on_el_pr/obama_ferraro

have you seen her media appearances?  she is doing a good job of fighting back.

the clinton campaign needs more of that.

theyve let those bastards holler 'racism' for months.

Yes, I've seen them, and she should shut up now.  She's becoming a bigger HP with every sentence she utters in defense of herself.

If a Republican said that there would be a good ole fashion political LYNCHING.

[WalterMitty]

your fellow obama supporters would call it a lynching.

but i would defend a republican if that said that too.

[Flying Dog]

She needs to stop picking at this ugly scab. It doesn't do anyone any good.

[Jake]

I don't know.  If HRC was a man, wouldn't "she" basically be John Edwards circa 2004?  And might not a "white Obama" be sort of like Howard Dean circa 2004 (except with less experience, but with a more competent campaign and without so many gaffes)?  It's worth noting that Howard Dean could have won the nomination in 2004 if he hadn't made so many gaffes and had run a more competent campaign.  It's entirely possible that a "white Obama" in 2008 could have stood out from the pack (because of his opposition to the initial invasion of Iraq) in a way that a "male Hillary Clinton" couldn't have.

She would've been "first lady" and in the Senate for the past eight years, so know she'd be more experienced than Edwards and would have the Clinton appeal. And Dean had a pretty damn good record in Vermont's government, something Obama certainly doesn't have.