When Kos Attacks!

Shares

When this and this are not atypical, but the most common type of post on the Kos front page, I think the site has started revving up the boat to jump the shark. I read Kos because I want insight about making the Democratic Party more successful and more progressive, not because I want to read relentless and often juvenile remarks about one candidate.

I am an Obama supporter. I wrote as much months ago. When, as a supporter, I find myself increasingly frustrated with the bitter, divisive attacks on Hillary Clinton by progressive bloggers, maybe it’s time to reevaluate the strategy.

Essentially, the Kos position seems to be:

  • Democratic candidates need to fight hard to win, unless they are Hillary Clinton.
  • that the Democratic Party’s rules on nomination are AWESOME when it comes to Florida and Michigan, but EVIL when it comes to super delegates.
  • that it’s perfectly acceptable to descend to the Faux News strategy of bleating the same idea repeatedly to drive one candidate out of the race.

If those of us on the Left or, even worse, Senator Obama, think that Hillary Clinton is being too tough on him in this primary season, then our chances are over in November. Come this summer, the nominee will be facing people who turned a decorated veteran into a war criminal and draft dodger against someone who was both of those things. It’s going to get much rougher than this.

Sometimes, in my more cynical moments, I think all of this is calculated to be able to blame Senator Clinton in the event that Democrats lose in 2008. That way, we won’t have to confront the institutional failures of our side one more time.

We’ve got two great candidates–both better than John McCain. Senator Obama can make this easy. He just needs to win out. We shouldn’t be trying to push one player off the field before the game’s over.

About the author

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba is a seventeen-year teacher of English, former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.

His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.

In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.

8 Comments

  • “Sometimes, in my more cynical moments, I think all of this is calculated to be able to blame Senator Clinton in the event that Democrats lose in 2008.”

    You’re not being cynical. It’s analogous to when the new Indiana Jones comes out – if it disappoints, I will blame it solely on Shiloh Labeouf, no matter the circumstances.

  • It’s not a question of Hillary being “tough.” I’m not even sure what this means.

    It’s a question, to me, of her being dishonest. She lies. She misrepresents her own background (Ireland, Bosnia) and she misrepresents what her opponent says. She uses slimy insinuations that work with many voters (like always mentioning that Obama’s “bitter” remark was made in San Francisco, which to many lunch-bucket Democrats means GAY). The suggestion is that Obama maybe isn’t man enough to bomb Iran, as she and McCain would.

    I value honesty and intellect not macho posturing in a presidential candidate. Being a “tough” liar doesn’t make HRC a qualified candidate for president.

    By the way, she is intelligent and has many good policy ideas. But she prefers crawling around in the gutter.

  • By “tough,” I mean hard hitting. The Clinton campaign has been lobbing softballs compared to what the Republicans will ramp up this fall. Just look at the sleazy NC ad they are running already.

    As for the San Francisco argument, it seems more than a bit presumptuous for you to argue that working class Democrats are all closet bigots. I have more faith in working men and women than that.

  • Please don’t twist my words, Mr. Anonymous. I didn’t say “working class Democrats are all closet bigots.” I said “many lunch-bucket Democrats” associate San Francisco with gays and that HRC is expoiting this bias.

    There’s a big difference between “all” and “many.”

  • My apologies. You are on much better ground when you only accuse many working class Americans as bigots.

    You know, just because you think that way, doesn’t mean Hillary Clinton was making an anti-gay comment at all. In fact, her record demonstrates a commitment to equal rights for gay Americans.

  • Why are you misconstruing my words? I didn’t say or imply that Hillary was anti-gay. She simply appealed to the bigotry of others to make an insinuation about her opponent. She uses whatever she can to harm Obama. For her, everything is tactical.

    And “San Francisco” is code for gay among a lot of midwestern blue-collar guys. Ever go to a Steeler-49er game?

    But I’m through with this topic.

  • Gotcha. Hillary’s not anti-gay; she’s just deliberately using homophobic code to appeal to the bigotry of blue collar workers.

    I appreciate your comments. I just don’t understand why Democrats aren’t and haven’t been talking about the differences in the health care plans offered by both candidates, their Iraq plans, and the stuff that matters.

    Instead, the whole debate for months has been about speculations about Hillary’s personality and motives. As an Obama supporter, I am tired of seeing it. How in the world are we going to bring Hillary’s supporters back into the campaign if Obama does win?

  • Thanks so much for giving everyone an update on this subject on your web site. Please realize that if a new post becomes available or in case any alterations occur with the current article, I would be interested in reading a lot more and knowing how to make good using of those tactics you discuss. Thanks for your efforts and consideration of others by making this website available.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: