Donna, maybe you're right. I'm just tired, and spoke too quickly. But that's ok that I change my mind, right? I'm a woman, after all.
Sorry. I'm not really offended. It's a good cartoon, but I belong to a group that used to be pro-Clinton. I'm just slow on the uptake.
I usually do not post on these type of things but I was looking around and came across this one. The comments are interesting and bring up great discussions. Because I'm a philosophy major, I'm interested in comics which are more than just "tickle the funny bone" for no reason. I like this format. And the cartoon is topical about current events that matter to people. Ken, I remember that from last year.
Obama generally has done just as well (or better) than Clinton in the match-up polls vs. McCain.
Certainly, some voters will not accept Obama because of race. However, it's not like Clinton doesn't face resistance based on gender. And, Clinton brings in her own special baggage (deserved or not).
It's ironic. About a year ago the assumption that Clinton was too polarizing to be able to win the general election even if she won the nomination. She didn't seem impressed by the electability argument then.
Oops, I meant to write "doesn't mean," not "doesn't means."
I also forgot to mention, Obama has also beaten Clinton in "states Democrats have to win in November," (to borrow a Clinton phrase) so I'm not comfortable with her argument on that front, either.
"DevBer," I'm not "for Obama" because I'm an AA. I thought Edwards would be the best choice, until he failed to win a single primary and dropped out.
As anyone who's read Candorville for a while might know, I don't have much patience for deception or for wedge issue politics. The Clinton campaign's been using both for months now. McCain's doing the same. I've been impressed with the scarcity of BS coming from the Obama campaign. I have yet to see him mischaracterize his opponents' words, use wedge issues to his advantage, or pander with bad but popular policies (e.g. the gas tax rebate). And those are traits that I'd come to assume were encoded in the DNA of the politician species. So I find that impressive.
"Just because she’s losing among Democrats doesn’t mean she’d lose among the general voting population."
That's the point, though. The converse is also true. Just because she's winning Democratic primaries in states like Kentucky and West Virginia doesn't means she'd win among the general voting population. The "electability" argument is based on the assumption that primary voting patterns are prescriptive of general election voting patterns. If that were the case, then the fact she's losing the primaries means she's more likely to lose the general.
It's not the case, though. Just as Obama winning in Iowa doesn't mean he's going to win Iowa in November, Clinton beating Obama in Pennsylvania doesn't mean she's going to beat McCain in Pennsylvania.
The "electability" argument is specious.
"She's a woman, after all." Oh, dear Lord, DevBer, I hope you're being humorous with that one, because if you're serious...well, I don't know. :) Honey, Senator Clinton, along with her hubby, survived 8 years of neocon attacks. She's Xena, not a delicate flower.
Clinton may have a point, though. The type of voter who chose her in West Virginia and Kentucky are likely to vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee. Just because she's losing among Democrats doesn't mean she'd lose among the general voting population. And she did carry swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, which can be problematic for the Democrats in the fall election.
And I'm saying all this as an Obama supporter. I've been ready to vote for him since his 2004 keynote address, when he so clearly articulated what my own vision for this country is. I simply don't think that Senator Clinton should be dismissed so easily.
Hi, guys or girls. This is my first time on this site. I see it's sort of like a blog? A message board? I'd like to comment on the comic, if you don't mind. That assumption about electability verses winning is positively horrendous. If you view the facts surrounding the real divide in the Democrats, you will ALL see that McCain will win. We HAVE to have war. The terrorists aren't wiped out completely yet. We have to get each and every one of them or our country will be in danger. We have to go into each and every country and kill them all. Who cares if women and children get killed? Better them than us.
Well, I voted for Hillary. So I don't appreciate your comment, Peace, and I think you should apologize to her. I think the comic strip is APPALLING. How dare ANYONE make fun of my Hillary? She's a woman, after all. You are A SELLOUT, Peace. And why would you do such a thing, Darrin? Are you for Obama because you are an AA? No disrespect intended.
Not all the emoticom shortcuts seem to work on this site. That's ok, they do the same think on my e mails in various free sites.
View Comments (15)
Donna, maybe you're right. I'm just tired, and spoke too quickly. But that's ok that I change my mind, right? I'm a woman, after all.
Sorry. I'm not really offended. It's a good cartoon, but I belong to a group that used to be pro-Clinton. I'm just slow on the uptake.
I usually do not post on these type of things but I was looking around and came across this one. The comments are interesting and bring up great discussions. Because I'm a philosophy major, I'm interested in comics which are more than just "tickle the funny bone" for no reason. I like this format. And the cartoon is topical about current events that matter to people. Ken, I remember that from last year.
Obama generally has done just as well (or better) than Clinton in the match-up polls vs. McCain.
Certainly, some voters will not accept Obama because of race. However, it's not like Clinton doesn't face resistance based on gender. And, Clinton brings in her own special baggage (deserved or not).
It's ironic. About a year ago the assumption that Clinton was too polarizing to be able to win the general election even if she won the nomination. She didn't seem impressed by the electability argument then.
Oops, I meant to write "doesn't mean," not "doesn't means."
I also forgot to mention, Obama has also beaten Clinton in "states Democrats have to win in November," (to borrow a Clinton phrase) so I'm not comfortable with her argument on that front, either.
"DevBer," I'm not "for Obama" because I'm an AA. I thought Edwards would be the best choice, until he failed to win a single primary and dropped out.
As anyone who's read Candorville for a while might know, I don't have much patience for deception or for wedge issue politics. The Clinton campaign's been using both for months now. McCain's doing the same. I've been impressed with the scarcity of BS coming from the Obama campaign. I have yet to see him mischaracterize his opponents' words, use wedge issues to his advantage, or pander with bad but popular policies (e.g. the gas tax rebate). And those are traits that I'd come to assume were encoded in the DNA of the politician species. So I find that impressive.
"Just because she’s losing among Democrats doesn’t mean she’d lose among the general voting population."
That's the point, though. The converse is also true. Just because she's winning Democratic primaries in states like Kentucky and West Virginia doesn't means she'd win among the general voting population. The "electability" argument is based on the assumption that primary voting patterns are prescriptive of general election voting patterns. If that were the case, then the fact she's losing the primaries means she's more likely to lose the general.
It's not the case, though. Just as Obama winning in Iowa doesn't mean he's going to win Iowa in November, Clinton beating Obama in Pennsylvania doesn't mean she's going to beat McCain in Pennsylvania.
The "electability" argument is specious.
"She's a woman, after all." Oh, dear Lord, DevBer, I hope you're being humorous with that one, because if you're serious...well, I don't know. :) Honey, Senator Clinton, along with her hubby, survived 8 years of neocon attacks. She's Xena, not a delicate flower.
Clinton may have a point, though. The type of voter who chose her in West Virginia and Kentucky are likely to vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee. Just because she's losing among Democrats doesn't mean she'd lose among the general voting population. And she did carry swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, which can be problematic for the Democrats in the fall election.
And I'm saying all this as an Obama supporter. I've been ready to vote for him since his 2004 keynote address, when he so clearly articulated what my own vision for this country is. I simply don't think that Senator Clinton should be dismissed so easily.
Hi, guys or girls. This is my first time on this site. I see it's sort of like a blog? A message board? I'd like to comment on the comic, if you don't mind. That assumption about electability verses winning is positively horrendous. If you view the facts surrounding the real divide in the Democrats, you will ALL see that McCain will win. We HAVE to have war. The terrorists aren't wiped out completely yet. We have to get each and every one of them or our country will be in danger. We have to go into each and every country and kill them all. Who cares if women and children get killed? Better them than us.
Well, I voted for Hillary. So I don't appreciate your comment, Peace, and I think you should apologize to her. I think the comic strip is APPALLING. How dare ANYONE make fun of my Hillary? She's a woman, after all. You are A SELLOUT, Peace. And why would you do such a thing, Darrin? Are you for Obama because you are an AA? No disrespect intended.
Not all the emoticom shortcuts seem to work on this site. That's ok, they do the same think on my e mails in various free sites.