She knows your anger, she knows your dreams
August 13, 2008 3 Comments
She’s been everything you want to be.
A full six months after she lost in the primary process and a full two months since she conceded the nomination, Hillary Clinton is not quite ready to give up the ghost of her failed presidential bid.
And her supporters are planning to disrupt the Democratic National Convention:
Frustrated supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) are planning multiple rallies at the Democratic convention in Denver, coupled with television and print advertisements.
The disenchanted Democrats want to express their disappointment with the party’s presidential primary process.
These are Democrats. Trying to kneecap the Democratic candidate:
The Denver Post recently reported that Clinton backers will hold signs that read, “Denounce Nobama’s Coronation.”
… some of the Denver Group’s goals are contrary to the Democratic Party’s. Its goals include: an open convention; Clinton’s name placed in nomination with no symbolic roll call vote; speeches allowed by supporters of Clinton on behalf of her candidacy; a genuine roll call vote with Clinton as a legitimate candidate; and “no coronation.”
This is absurd. Hillary Clinton is no longer a legitamate candidate. It is important to note how this call for a revival of the Clinton candidacy is not about the policies offered by the candidates or their goals for this country. The difference between the goals and policies of the candidates are minimal. This is all about Hillary.
The big talk this year was that Obama was creating a Cult of Personality around him. It’s easy to see why. And Democrats have a way of doing that. It’s how they’ve won. Think Kennedy and Clinton.
The Republicans, on the other hand, build a movement and find someone to represent it, like an oligarch puppet. Think Reagan and Bush.
However, for all the talk of Obama as some sort of godhead, it’s not true. In fact, in many ways, it was just the opposite in this year’s primary battle.
Obama tapped a movement, a generational wave that is tired of watching our parents fight with our grandparents over things that we see as simply being.
These are things that we see as simply settled already – we see their shadowboxing as distracting from the critical issues effecting our world.
We have big issues that need solving and require a new way of looking at problems. Boomer ways have failed – often spectacularly – in today’s world.
Hillary Clinton, however, being an establishment Boomer Democrat, tried to create the traditional Democratic cult of personality as a strategy for winning the White House. With the overall political climate rampant for change, the Clintons assumed that meant from Republican to Democrat, not a change from the bitter worldview and vendetta politics they helped perfect. So the Clinton Campaign set out to build their cult of personality, this time in a New and Improved Sixties style: a woman in charge.
How’s that for change?
It failed, partly because the change people want is not from one brand of VCR to another, but to DVDs and digital media instead.
Mainly, it failed because it ran into a movement, a new generation that rejected the bitter politics of the baby boomers. As the ongoing childish fights of the sixties played themselves out in the past two elections, the confrontation played itself out and changed out from under the Boomers.
The Clintons did not fail, however, in creating their traditional Democratic cult of personality. They did it very well and Hillary has become somewhat of a cult leader of near Oprah-like magnitude. Some Boomer women see themselves in Hillary – exactly as she wanted them to – and she played into it, pushing their Sixties feminism buttons and making Hillary’s loss seem entirely due to how a woman still can’t get a fair shake, despite the simple fact that Hillary was the front-runner and presumed nominee at the beginning of the primary season.
That Hillary was a serious and formidable candidate is proof that women hadn’t missed their moment, but in fact had won the war.
She further proved that by winning the redneck vote in overwhelming margins. If that’s not proof of the success of feminism, I don’t know what is. Sure her opponent is black, but he is still a man and even the typical blue collar knuckledraggers voted to have a woman in charge.
However, the success of the cult of personality that defines Hillary as a victim of sexism is still visible as Hillary supporters continue to show they do not necessarily support the ideals of the candidate, but instead only the candidate herself.
That’s a cult, not a political party.
So Clinton supporters, the choice is this: either you can support the candidate who supports 99 percent of Hillary’s policy proposals or you can completely sell out any semblance of ideals and allow for four more destructive years of Bush Republicanism in the White House. What will it be?
The policy differences between the Democrats are minimal. It was a style and world view difference that won it, really. A generational perspective shift.
By continuing to – dare I say it – cling to their candidate and withholding their support until they get their way, the Clinton supporters are showing that the differences between a movement that found a voice and a campaign built around a godhead cult of personality.
Until then, this is just another tantrum of the generation of perpetual childhood. If it were about the ideas, they would already be on board.