Democratic National Convention '08

[innerSpaceman]

And, CP, I suppose we could try to raise money (and I applaud you for doing just that) ... but there's no one to talk to in California. The state is LOCKED for him.

There's no point in chatting up our neighbors or grocery clerks or postman. The state has consistently voted for the Democratic presidential candidate since before anyone here was born.


Personally, I'm not good at raising money, and I don't like doing it. So I'm officially out of the fight to elect Obama (though I will make a small donation myself).

[Prudence]

So are student loans now considered an government handout for those of us too lazy to work hard and pay our own way?

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Prudence

So are student loans now considered an government handout for those of us too lazy to work hard and pay our own way?

Certainly not by me, they fall under the category of existing programs that work or at least used to work. Apparently there have been some negative changes since I last delved into the subject in depth.

[innerSpaceman]

But again, unless we are going to hire a bus and go to Ohio or Michigan or somewhere 2,000 miles away, our attitudes here in California mean nothing.


And, with all due respect, I think people who find the Obama campaign uniquely inspiring (with respect to others, not themselves) are being a little short-sighted. The Clinton campaign had the same effect on people, and much of the same pie-in-the-sky hopes and promises and, may I say, much better speechifying inspired all that ... just as Obama is doing now.


That's why it seems a re-tread to me. And frankly, though Obama's was the better speech, he still can't deliver one like Clinton. Perhaps it was a poor choice to have Bill speak the night before.



* * * *

That said, I enjoyed Obama's speech and I think he's a fine enough orator. It was fun watching the Convention this year. I didn't realize the Dems had so many heavyweights. I enjoyed the speeches by Bill and Hillary, Al Gore and especially Dennis Kucinich far better than I did Obama's. I heard Bill Richardson gave a good speech, too, and that - of all people - John Kerry wasn't bad, but I missed those.

And they had to sideline Jimmy Carter and John Edwards.




Do the Republicans have anything like a similar line-up of political "Stars?"

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

But again, unless we are going to hire a bus and go to Ohio or Michigan or somewhere 2,000 miles away, our attitudes here in California mean nothing.

All I'm saying is if someone is sitting there thinking, "Oh god, what if Democrats don't keep up the energy to get him elected. Oh god, it's horrible. Oh god, he's going to lose!!" it is liable to become self-fulfilling prophecy.

I'm a believer that, even though California isn't a battle ground state, overall results are moved by large forces. And large forces are created by small elements. Mood matters, the tone of discourse matters. Whether someone in Ohio hears what you or I post individually matters not. But every little statement adds up to something. Every poll result that shows a slip in Obama's standing in the worthless but flashy popular vote adds fuel to the defeatist fire.

Defeatism breeds defeat.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Defeatism breeds defeat.

I think there's a distinction between defeatism and thinking he doesn't necessarily have it in the bag.

I don't agree with iSm. I think a vote is a vote. Yes, there's the whole electoral college thing, but the numbers are still there in the end. How many people voted in California is important even if we're a sure thing. And I wonder how many times people thought not to vote because their state was going to lean one way and then, surprise, it went the other way on Election Day.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

I think there's a distinction between defeatism and thinking he doesn't necessarily have it in the bag.

And I think you're misreading positivity for complacency.

And you've got to be kidding about Gore and Kerry. No two blander candidates could have been nominated. No one was excited for them to win. THEY hardly seem excited at their prospects of winning. Some were optimistic that the party was strong, but no one cared whether it was Gore, Kerry, or a plank of wood up there.

I'm not saying Obama's charisma and the excitement around him are guarantees he'll win. I'm saying those are the qualities that are keeping people motivated to see it through. Those are the qualities that have a libretarian ex Rush Limbaugh follower raising funds for him.

Of course he might not win. I just see continually saying, "But he might not win," as wasted energy. You vote for him. You tell people why you're voting for him. You contribute what effort and/or money you can to convince more people to vote for him. You talk about how the country will be better if they vote for him. Those are the things that matter for getting him elected.

At best, talking about "he might lose" does nothing but give you something to worry about. At worst it saps the motivation and momentum he needs to win.

[Gemini Cricket]

No, I'm not kidding about Gore and Kerry. There was a drive back then to help them. People were all revved up to help. But was it because it was that people were afraid of the alternative? Most likely. So, yes, in this case it may be different.

But this gut feeling I have about Obama not winning (although he should) was the same gut feeling I had about both Al and John and it was right around the same time of year 4 and 8 years ago. Heck, I want to be proved wrong.

Doesn't worry sometimes help? Fear of failure motivates people to do better. Positivity alone is just positivity.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

And you've got to be kidding about Gore and Kerry. No two blander candidates could have been nominated. No one was excited for them to win.

Too bad about Gore. Such a poor candidate then, such a better one now. I found his speech last night more compelling than the actual candidate's.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

AAnd you've got to be kidding about Gore and Kerry. No two blander candidates could have been nominated. No one was excited for them to win.

You're wrong about this. Just because you weren't excited about them doesn't mean no one was. Some of us were excited about them and donated to them and travelled to other states to campaign for them.