Why I Won't Vote For Either of Them

. . . . . . regardless of the outcome in Denver.

I will only vote . . . for both of them.

After a brief set of standard disclaimers, I will enumerate some of the reasons that this is so for me.
Disclaimers: I am not, and have never been a “Clinton Supporter” or an “Obama Supporter”. Neither of them was "my" candidate, and I have equally thorny problems with both of them for various reasons. I am not, and have never claimed to be a “pundit”, and I steer clear of most political discussions on this and other blogs because I’m too fucking old not to see that most of it is just the same old rehash. When I have weighed in, it is usually on issues of privilege, oppression, and the need for social change.
Now, on with the show.

As I have said several times in comments – if the DNC doesn’t come away from Denver with and Obama/Clinton ticket, or a Clinton/Obama ticket, I will tear up my registration card and wash my hands of the Democratic Party forever, because it will be clear to me that the Democratic Party has no interest in actually electing a Democrat as POTUS.

Here are my reasons for insisting upon a dual ticket of rivals who are within 2% of one another in popular vote, and within 5% of one another in pledged delegates:

  1. In order to be effective, the first Democratic White House in eight years needs a huge public mandate in November – a clear win. (Hell, the Dems may need that mandate just to win the General Election at all, if the RNC attempts to steal votes. Again.)
    • No matter how much you love your candidate, it doesn’t change the fact that neither Obama nor Clinton have such a mandate sewn up – or the fact that each alone cannot sweep the GE without a substantial portion of the other’s base. (As has been said so many times during this primary season: Do the math.)
    • No matter how much you may hate the “not-your” candidate, the facts directly above don’t change just because you feel pissy about them – AND – there is a very real chance that the strengths of each would serve as an excellent counter to the weaknesses of the other in strategizing against the inevitable Republican attacks which will be launched during the run up to the General. (RNC: “B-b-b-but . . . experience!!!” Dems: “Clinton.” RNC: “B-b-b-but . . . . in bed with the old guard!!!!” Dems: “Obama.” Yes, this sucks and it’s probably not even true, but welcome to politics, kids.)
  2. In order to be effective, the first Democratic White House in eight years needs a solid Democratic majority in Congress, and if disgruntled Obama or Clinton supporters stay home, down-ticket elections would be negatively impacted.
  3. It would scare the living hell out of the RNC.
Last night I was having a conversation with an Obama supporter. (It was basically like having the entire MSM live at my kitchen table, as his talking points were exclusively gathered from the radio that he listens to all day, every day, at his carpentry job. Wev. Saves me watching the "news", anyway.)

When I suggested that a dual ticket is really the only logical option for the Democrats in November, he said: “Oh, that will never happen. After all the ugliness? After everything Clinton has done, it could never happen.”

I replied that when I view the current Cirque Du Merde that is US politics, the historical comparative which comes most readily to mind is post-republican Rome. In the days of the freshly-minted Caesars, there were many ceremonies of "public reconciliation" in which two bitter enemies performed air-kisses through gritted teeth – often to put an end to public rioting and violence which had flared up between their factions.

I went on to say (and I believe this with every fiber of my being) that if Clinton and Obama aren’t able to swallow their bile and do what’s right for the nation, then neither of them deserve to be President of the United States.

The job of the next POTUS/Veep combo is going to be a daunting one. As the new administration begins clean-up of Bush/Cheney clusterfuckitude, the NeoCons will almost certainly attempt to displace responsibility for the consequences of the last eight years onto a new president, who will face extremely difficult choices (especially if there is not strong support in Congress) about the war, the economy, and our crumbling infrastructure.

In order to be effective, that administration will need a tri-fecta of Congressional support, a sweeping public mandate, and personal fortitude/focus, the like of which has not been seen in this country for decades.

As galling as it may be to Obama/Clinton supporters, and to the candidates themselves, they need each other – and pretending otherwise is just plain stupid.

I am a Democrat, not a Dumocrat. I will not vote for the Stoooooopid Ticket.

Full stop.

Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.

blog comments powered by Disqus