Back

Remember when there was a hugh hugh emphasis on race in the elections? That was when T Top T stopped posting about the elections; it was disheartening that the United States is not as color blind as T Top T perceived. But after a few months accepting it we’re back with more observations:

1) The Democratic Party is not being smart about this Clinton vs Obama campaign. They know that over the horizon is a national presidential election yet at the same time they are not doing the best to position themselves to win it. It is right now in this moment that Obama has the most momentum. There’s not point in waiting till after Clinton wins West Virginia, or the split the Kentucky Oregon primaries. He needs to receive the nomination with momentum of a solid victory, not falling over the finish line. It will hurt him to wait just because going into November his last memory of a real competition would be a loss or an almost loss. If they wanted the best position they would need to immediately end this race, and the 14 point victory and the come back from Indiana would give momentum.

2) The Limbaugh Effect: Sounds like a title to an episode of the Big Bang Theory but in a close race everything can influence the outcome. Clinton won the Republican vote 54% to 46% in Indiana. That vote constituted 10% of the people who voted. 1.27 million people voted, so roughly 127,000 republicans voted. That’s 68,580 republican votes for Clinton, the big question is with a margin of 15000 in the count for the state how many of those 68k will actually vote for Clinton in the general election. They could have just been listening to Rush Limbaugh and voting for a candidate they think is easier to beat. It is rather amusing that all this drama with Clinton still in the race and all her reasons for staying could be propped up by Republicans who want her to be nominated so they stand a better chance. The republicans are dominant when it comes to politics, I think in any close election they’d win. Look, even with the war and the economy a republican is running even with what is suppose to be two really strong democratic candidates. Maybe we need a third party who can stand up to the Republicans.

3) Saying that as a Democrat you will not vote for Obama if he wins because you are a Clinton supporter, or vice versa sounds pretty snobby to me. Like little kids that can’t get their way. Both sides. The only people with a legitimate reason to say something like that are republicans that are supporting either candidate.

4) This race thing is stupid. Merely for the simple facts that A) Obama is half black and half white – a product of the mixing bowl. B) He was raised by a white single mom and his white grandparents. C) He partially grew up in Indonesia which is a place where both blacks and whites are minorities as well as Hawaii that is, for all intents and purposes, one of the most color blind places on earth is. Stupid to make a decision based on ethnicity, especially when you can’t point to Obama and say he’s black without being WRONG.

5) Not voting for Clinton because she’s a woman is equally as stupid. Half the population can’t be president because they are female? You are the elitist because you think that way. On the converse voting for her because she is a woman, as well as voting for Obama because he’s black are reasons almost as stupid as not. It’s not your job to balance out the votes of the bigots. You become part of the problem when you make a decision based on sex or ethnicity. Ethnicity should not be a tool to keep you down or to prop you a step up. Gender should not be a tool to keep you down or prop you up. America is not a nation that should be making a decision based on either.

6) Obama should take public funding, and both him and McCain should denounce any tampering from other organizations. He promised public funding but should not be forced to do it if the republicans are going to use negative attacks. It costs more to defend negative attacks than to make them.

Dear Hilary,

Dear Hilary,

The Hilary that I hear about is the one that you would want to have a beer with, as opposed to Bill. The Hilary that is friendly, and understanding. Everyone who’s worked for Hilary is fiercely loyal to her, and really believes in her. The problem is the Hilary that I see. The Hilary I see is the classic politician, textbook stances on things like Cuba, textbook example of how a politician becomes more and more powerful. The Hilary that has run a campaign that is pretty much a normal campaign, it’s shifted a little once your opponent showed that promoting change and recruiting the youth vote helps. A campaign that’s also tried some very underhanded politics this time around.

Hilary, I think you’re definitely very good at politics. You’ve built a team that’s very good at politics, a team that can look at numbers and statistical data and tell you what to wear and what to do and what to say. The problem is all this is just to get people to vote for you. In the end it’s all just politics. The problem is, in 4 or 8 years there will be another person just like you. There will be another politician that has built everything up the same way and is good at politics. But it’s not every 4 or 8 years that we see someone that can bring a whole generation into politics and that can stir up so much excitement. A candidate that can bring hope of change and move people to tears with powerful speeches is hard to come by.

There’s two ways you win from here on out. You win the popular vote, more delegates, and the big states. Half the population that voted in the democratic primaries drops off the face of the world. You could win or lose, it’s a coin toss. That’s the best case scenario. What if it’s close but Obama wins the popular vote but you somehow pull out a victory with delegates, what will happen then. For all the Democratic Party’s complaining about winning the popular vote but losing the election. For all the times people talked about what “the people” want. Would you take this victory at that expense? Would you take victory at any expense to democracy or to the Democratic Party? At what expense would you take a victory? Where would you draw the line? From where I’m standing it looks like you’d sacrifice almost anything, arguing now about how superdelegates making the decision are okay sounds like you’d give up an ounce of democracy for the win.

I think you’ve been in politics too long to see it now. The layers and layers of politics that you’ve surrounded yourself with no longer apply in this society. People want to see real, and true people, they actually want to see who you are. From everything I’ve heard it’s down there and can be revealed. Lose this one, take 4 – 8 years and peel off all the layers and layers of politics. Get away from the Washington DC-ness that you’ve become. Let the next election not be about what your opponent did or did not do but about who you are and what you will do. It needs to not be about attacking the other person, or trying to point out faults, or doing things to make them look bad. Get away from the politics and make it about what type of person you are, or what you can do. Look at what getting away from politics got Al Gore? Get away from the politics and actually be there for the people, get away from the politics and then you’ll really be change. Otherwise you’re just another good politician, not a great leader for America.

Sincerely,

Toilet Top Toast