Comments | dahled: If he were white would you still not "trust him"?

dahled

If he were white would you still not "trust him"?

Sep 30, 2008 12:12

so how do you not call someone a racist to their face when they say "I can't put my finger on it but I just don't trust Obama" and they've been an otherwise loyal democrat ( Read more... )

Comments 11

xxneo_101xx September 30 2008, 19:45:02 UTC

Wow , Good point !!!!!!!

Well... nathanhj September 30 2008, 20:03:49 UTC

I think the point in these situation is less to make the person trust Obama, but to show them that there is no way in hell they want to vote for McCain.

"Have you been satisfied with the past 8 years of Bush?"

"No? Given that McCain votes 95% with Bush, in what major ways would he be different?"

"Hmm. What issues do you care most about? Really? And which ones of those has McCain take a position that you agree with?"

"So, if that's all true, why would you vote for McCain and not some other candidate, doesn't have to be Obama, that actually represents your views? Do you really want a McCain presidency on your conscience?"

Re: Well... dahled September 30 2008, 20:38:07 UTC

it's just so hard...
good ideas though - the issues one specifically.

Re: Well... elliotharmon September 30 2008, 20:53:59 UTC

A lot of liberals still have a residual soft spot for McCain, based on stances he was making 10+ years ago. Keep the discussion focused on his recent voting record. With the American right in the state that it's in, there's really no reason to think he'll stop being crazy when he's not campaigning anymore.

Re: Well... nathanhj September 30 2008, 20:58:35 UTC

Yeah, especially since people largely don't decide based on issues. But if they think of themselves as a Democrat for a reason, then you have to engage those Democratic values in order to discredit McCain as a viable option.

The goal isn't to win a voter for Obama, but to keep this person from voting for McCain, even if that means not voting at all (which, for professional reasons, I'm basically against as a tactic, but sometimes is the best way to go from a Machiavellian point of view).

Why did they become a Democrat? Why don't the vote Republican? What are the values and issues that drive that identification? How does McCain represent a betrayal of those values and issues? That's where you want to go.

If you think you can get away with it, then a discussion of race is definitely warranted, but, as you know, honkies don't do well with discussions of race, especially in this glorious post-racial era in which we are all living together in peace and harmony.

jesseparent September 30 2008, 20:04:06 UTC

I trust him, I just don't know if he can do the job. Hillary has a ton more experience, but I like how Obama tells it like it is and how he doesn't let anyone rush him into a decision. But I am still not convinced of Obama's level of experience (although it is LAUGHABLE to compare him to a Governor of two years who barely got a bachelor's in 5 years)

But I didn't trust Hillary... on account of her vagina.

-Jesster

dahled September 30 2008, 20:36:52 UTC

How exactly is it that HRC has a "ton more" experience again? She's been in the senate slightly longer than BO but he's been an elected official for an additional 12 years while she was the wife of one. I never understood the experience gained by that proximity to power... is it osmosis? I'll give her "she's been around Washington a lot longer" but a "ton" more is hyperbole to say the least.

jesseparent September 30 2008, 20:45:41 UTC

Not hyperbole. Researching her career was a very eye opening experience. Many of Bill's policies surrounding social programs were actually brainchildren of Hillary's. Her universal health care program was derailed senselessly, and I was looking forward to seeing what she would do once she was in the big chair.

To dismiss her record in the shadow of Bill is a bit naive.

-Jesster

dahled September 30 2008, 21:18:09 UTC

I'm not dismissing her record, which I have researched. i just don't see what she has as anything approaching a "ton" more experience. To say that it is disregards the, literally, hundreds of bills sponsored and cosponsored by Obama in the state senate. Why is being married to Bill more experiential that being elected to a statewide office? Equally experiential maybe... maybe - but more so - bull.

Thread 5

kashe October 1 2008, 01:12:27 UTC

I concentrate on the Supreme Court, and use issues other than Roe V Wade. If it is an experience thing as well, I point out how long he served as Illinois State Senator, how many people he rep's, how many things he pushed through, and that he has already shown that he gets a wide array of advice and would pick the best cabinet.