Who do Republicans/'moderates' hate more?

[danaeris]

So I've heard people say that if Hillary wins the primary, we're fucked because Republicans hate her ass. I've heard people say that if Obama wins the primary, we're fucked, because Republicans see him as a brown man like the bad bad terrorist men.

Opinions? Who is more likely to fuck us sideways from Sunday during the actual presidential election?

Please play nice. ;)

Comments

[garden_hoe21]

*yawn* Wake me in November...

Must be nice to be a dual-cit...

[happypete.livejournal.com]

...and get to watch this mess from the other side of the border.

Seriously, though...anyone who buys the latter argument overestimates the bigotry of the republicans who actually vote.

IMo, most of the people who would buy into that second line are also the ones least likely to bother to make it to the polls.

Obama has a better chance of beating McCain.

[insomnia.livejournal.com]

Opinions?!

Ultimately, it won't matter what a minority of sexist, racist Republicans think. Most Americans aren't like that, and probably most Republicans aren't either. And whatever they throw up against Obama won't stick at a national level. It's already been tried, and has failed badly.

Other than that, Obama is the most electable candidate according to every poll that has been taken in recent times, and he also has about 3-4 times the fundraising and grassroots strength of Hillary Clinton. We know he can win a race based on change vs. experience, in large part because *he just did*.

There are clear reasons why he is winning this race, and those are the same reasons he will clearly and decisively beat John McCain, with perhaps the biggest landslide we've witnessed for a Democratic president in modern history.

It's telling that at least one Republican expert thinks Obama can outspend McCain by a 3-1 ratio... and considering that Kerry almost beat an incumbent president with only half the money of that president, that's horrible news for the Republicans... especially since Obama will have strong, funded grassroots campaigns in every state.

The fact that his campaign will be funded by millions of small online donations means Obama will be free to speak to tens of thousands of Americans at a time several times a day, while John McCain is forced to spend a considerable amount of time at small fundraisers, courting big-money donors so he can afford to stay in the race.

And Obama won't just be electing himself. He'll be bringing in a *LOT* of Democrats on his coattails. That's what the financial reality of this race means to the Republicans -- the severe risk of a nightmare scenario.

Hillary Clinton can't run reliably as a change candidate, because she is part of the establishment. She can't run on reform, because she gladly takes money from lobbyists. She can't run on unity, because she is very divisive.

If she runs, she will have few issues where she has a clear advantage over McCain, while McCain will have numerous issues to attack her on. He will also do a better job of reaching out to independent voters.

Ultimately though, it's kind of irrelevant. Voting for Clinton right now for anyone would be practically like throwing away a vote, because the upcoming states after Ohio and Texas are such that there is literally no way that Barack Obama could lose them, especially with about a 4-1 edge on the amount available to spend in those states.

[johno.livejournal.com]

The Repulican machine has 16 years of Hilary hate to tap into and they can be obvious about using it. The race card can't be played overtly, so the rabid anti-color folks wont be as whipped up.

Hilary has the experience to be a good president. She's a good horse trader, she knows where the bodies are buried and she has the balls to take on the other side head on. It would not be a quiet presidency if Hilary won.

Obama has vision and drive, but lacks experience. He'll come in with grand ideas and a sunny outlook, and have barely a clue on how to work with all the different critters in congress. His will presidency would be one of grand speaches and very little progress.

McCain, unfortunatly would be just more of the same of the previous 6 years. War, Tax Cuts, Cuts in government services, and still soaring deficits.

[cos]

So I am curious, why do you say Obama lacks experience? I know that's an idea the Clinton campaign tries to promote, but I am curious why so many people believe it to be true.

[dragontdc.livejournal.com]

He's a "freshman" senator. Fewer years on Capitol Hill.

[cos]

Just that? He served three terms in the Illinois Senate before that, so he has more years as a legislator than Clinton (since 1997 for him, vs. since 2001 for her). He also seems to be a more prolific and effective US Senator than she is (though she's quite good at her job too). It's not like a term and a half in the US Senate - Clinton's total time in elected office - is a huge amount of experience. Both she and he had a lot of relevant experience before they ran for office, but if you just count their time in office then he definitely has more.

[dragontdc.livejournal.com]

I think Clinton's trying to count her time as First Lady. True, she was immersed in what was going on closer to the presidency, but I don't think it counts as much as her camp seems to.

[cos]

It's relevant. Just as having a background in law is relevant (both of them do), and Obama's growing up in Indonesia is relevant. Clinton has a lot of experience, no doubt. Obama also has experience. Neither of them "lacks" it.

[geekosaur]

As others have said: racism is a minority position even among Republicans (a very noisy one, but thankfully noise isn't votes).

Hatred of both Clintons, on the other hand, is very much a majority Republican position.

No contest.

[gentlescholar.livejournal.com]

Yeah, what they said. Obama is way more electable. I said it last year: Obama can beat every Republican, Hilary can beat every Democrat, and any Republican can beat Hilary. I am pleased beyond description that Obama has been doing well lately; I thought we were doomed.

I'm also damned pleased McCain is going to be the Republican nominee, as we might get something slightly closer to a clean campaign and content in the debates. I find it heartening that for the first time in my life, I'll be choosing somebody to vote *for*, not *against.* (Sadly, I have to vote Democrat this time around, just to fight the trend of the country this decade. So I don't really get to choose; but it's nice to know the worst-case scenario is not as bad as Bush.)

[kallisti.livejournal.com]

Based upon living for a few years down in the Southern States, I would say that way more people will hate, and I do use that term purposely, hate Obama because he is black. Thus, more people will go out and vote for the white man, McCain. The polls are bogus, because no one is going to tell a pollster that they are racist. And even in places like New York City, where I have lived as well, the same goes, but to a lessor extent.

Some days, I have to check the calendar to see what year this really is...or what century.

ttyl

[awfief.livejournal.com]

hey um.......most Republicans are gonna vote Republican. Most Democrats are gonna vote Democrat. The Republicans are gonna sling mud at the Democratic candidate.

So it really doesn't matter....though IMO, it's a tough call, between Obama being black ("OMG don't vote for him because he's black, that's unfair to the white folks, we Republicans hates affirmative action, my precious") and that whole "Muslim/not Muslim/not that there's anything wrong with that" thing....but Hillary has all the bad Clinton stuff, including allowing her husband to have OMG SEXUAL INFIDELITY IN TEH MARRIAGE! and the whole being investigated for the financial crap they were investigated for (real estate? I forget).

Clinton's mud will stick to her, but Obama's fake mud is "worse". Dunno. I'd rather have Obama than Clinton, so there ya go.

[visage.livejournal.com]

hey um.......most Republicans are gonna vote Republican. Most Democrats are gonna vote Democrat. The Republicans are gonna sling mud at the Democratic candidate.

The question raised is thus more about how many of each vote. Right now, the religious and nativist portions of the republican base are not happy that McCain is likely to be the nominee. If that persists, fewer of them will vote, and fewer of them will vote for one of the two major candidates.

Put Senator Clinton on the democratic ticket, and that all goes out the window. The republicans will vote, and vote for McCain, to keep her out of the white house. I'm unconvinced that Obama will have anywhere near that effect.

[kallisti.livejournal.com]

Again, from my time in the South, they are far more racist than most people realize. And the same goes for places like New York State, outside NYC. Take Metro North, or the LIRR further out, and note how people will not sit beside blacks. And in upstate, outside of the cities is even worse.

I don't think that either of the possible Democratic candidates have an advantage...Clinton has her history, and Obama has US's racist history, each something major to fight against.

[cos]

Both of these candidates have run for office in large states already, and in both cases, states with a *lot* of Republicans. Based on that, I think we can tell that Republicans really hate Clinton, much much more than Obama, but that Clinton can still win despite that. However, as Obama says, I strongly suspect that a Clinton presidency would be narrower (both in terms of the vote that brings here there, and the coalition she governs with) than an Obama presidency.

[trowa-barton.livejournal.com]

Evangelical Christians (the perverts).

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

I agree with much of what's been posted above, but I wanted to add something. Racism isn't just a Southern problem, they are just more upfront about it there. Believe me, it's alive and well in Yankee territory as well, but there it's whispered instead of shouted.

That being said I think Obama has been very good at winning over people because he doesn't make white people feel guilty. He is great at presenting himself as an American first and foremost, not a Black American.

I think if Republicans start in on him with the whole Black and/or Muslim thing it will backfire, just like it has with Hillary. The fact is that he's not Muslim and he's not a terrorist, and when he demands to know who's making those baseless and hateful comments McCain better hope it's no one that can be directly connected to his campaign or he'd be finished.

[vsbooklady.livejournal.com]

hey um.......most Republicans are gonna vote Republican. Most Democrats are gonna vote Democrat. The Republicans are gonna sling mud at the Democratic candidate.

actually, no, at least not in parts of Louisiana/Mississippi (I grew up in New Orleans, but all my family is from Miss)
I am not kidding when I say when I was growing up almost NO ONE was a Republican because of *The Civil War*. Lincoln was a Republican. It's a bit different now, but there are definitely "democrats" in the South ("dixiecrats") who are absolutely not going to vote for a black man. Wow, and do they *hate* Hillary Clinton. A lot of my mom's (female) friends will just go off on her. According to my mom, it sounds like a combination of sour grapes/sexism.
Obama's a little young, but McCain's definitely too old. Obama needs a running mate who is thought of as "experienced".
As far as I'm concerned, at the point the US needs a PR president to make us look better to the rest of the world.
Obama, definitely.

[vsbooklady.livejournal.com]

you know, I was just thinking... I know a lot of people who will say they hate Bush, but they're nowhere near as vitriolic as some people are about either of the Clintons.

[kgola.livejournal.com]

I heard someone say the other day that they think the republican party is paying Nader to run so that he splits the vote. She then said she thought the smartest thing the democratic party could do would be to pay Huckabee to run as an independent to split the Republican vote.