Why Hillary backers should be angry
Hillary backers should be angry because Obama, the DNC, and the liberal media have shown nothing but disrespect for Hillary and her supporters throughout the nomination process and in the two and a half months since she dropped out of the race. This sort of treatment is unprecedented in modern history and stands in stark contrast to how other nomination contenders have been treated. A harsh double standard exists, and Hillary supporters are right to suspect that it's partially because Hillary is a woman.
It's not like Hillary has made much of a protest against an Obama coronation since she dropped out of the race. Yes, she was seen on YouTube receiving a suggestion positively that she should be the VP nominee. Bill Clinton has refused to offer a real endorsement. But Hillary has not made any public statements that suggest she's going to undermine Obama. On the contrary, she's only expressed public support. When compared to other contenders who have received far less public support, her actions can only be considered loyal.
Anytime one tunes into MSNBC, however, he or she is likely to hear a threat aimed at Hillary that she had better do all she can to get Obama elected or there will be hell to pay. In an almost thuggish way, Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann dare her to do anything that will give them an excuse to call her disloyal. They hint, in fact expressly state, that if Obama loses Hillary will be the one to blame. These are the same people who should have received paychecks from the Obama campaign for their vocal support of his candidacy. They are not alone. Bigger and far more important media figures parrot the line that Hillary's political future depends entirely on whether anyone detects a hint of desire on Hillary's part for Obama to lose, real or imagined.
No contender for a party's nomination has received such harsh treatment from the media. Ted Kennedy made his opposition to a Carter nomination clear during the 1980 convention. Jerry Brown voiced discontent with the nominee in 1992 and Jesse Jackson did the same in 1988. The 1968 convention devolved into fights over party differences. The media respected these candidates because they had voter support. Hillary had vastly more voter support than any of these candidates, yet she receives nothing but threats and mockery.
Obama picked one of his competitors for the nomination. Usually when a contender for the nomination is picked, the nominee picks the second-place finisher. Kerry picked Edwards and Reagan picked Bush, among other less recent examples. By picking a contender who won almost no votes in Iowa over Hillary who won eighteen million votes, Obama devalued Hillary's supporters.
The fact that Obama did not even consider Hillary, a fact made clear when it came out that she was not even vetted, further shows Obama's lack of respect for Hillary's vast voter support. This fact should anger her supporters. It shows a complete disregard for her candidacy and the fact that Obama needs her supporters. It suggests that he simply does not care about them.
Hillary has been roughed up severely by much of the Democratic establishment, specifically the media and the DNC . The DNC made its preference for Obama clear through its treatment of Florida and Michigan and statements made by Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi during the primaries. The media undoubtedly worked overtime to get Obama nominated. No matter how vociferously the media pleads for party loyalty, Hillary backers have every right to be angry. They have been disrespected at every significant point in the process. To simply fall in line behind a candidate who relied on and encouraged such unfair treatment to win the nomination would just add to the list one more group who disrespects Hillary supporters, themselves.
The Ref | 8/25/08 | Permalink