NOTE: Before continuing, I want to note that the following words are not meant as harsh so much as sardonic, satirical, and generally a reflection of my own bemusement. So if any of it seems to come from a place of malice, that is not my intent.
I’ve been watching coverage of the DNC spottily (word?). Last night I happened to catch some of Larry King Live afterward and had the misfortune of watching a certain Ms. Elizabeth Joyce talk about her “Just Say No Deal” stance in regard to Obama. From what I could gather from the garbled responses to King’s questions, it seems that she feels (as a prior Hillary supporter) she has been shafted by the DNC and not given adequate reason to give her vote to Barrack.
Visiting her website, I understand her stance better now, but I will get to that shortly. The muddled statements that came out of her mouth last night was quasi-scrutable and unfortunately prime SNL fodder (possibly their next cold open). She kept making analogies about ‘not voting on the first date’ and ‘being a good, Catholic democrat from Boston’, etc. She also eluded to how Obama supporters and DNC representatives have not made an adequate effort to ask for her vote, have not reached out to her or her fellow Clinton supports (citing the fact that when in the lobby of the convention center wearing her Clinton pin, no one made an effort to include her). All of which left me wondering what she thought might happen: does she expect Obama to apologize for how his staffer might have acted towards the other side during the primary race? Does she expect Obama to specifically address former Clinton supporters and ask them to switch to his side? These questions were not clearly answered during the interview.
Upon reading some of the more coherent ramblings on her website, it seems that her concerns about Obama are more legitimate than she expressed during her appearance on Larry King Live (which I’ve since seen appear on YouTube and read pans about on various sites). She is concerned about his lack of experience or his lack of a long or strong voting record as signs that he is fit and ready to be president. I can appreciate those concerns, I see those points, but I guess I’ve also come to accept our voting process as, in general, a choice between the lesser of 2 evils. And given the choice between a green-horn who seems to parrot my ideals and a septuagenarian POW who might not survive a whole term, I’m currently leaning towards the one who might at least TRY to make the changes I’d like to see in the world (hint: his name rhymes with “Yo’ Mama”).
While I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinions and the right to have a say in these elections through voting, and I also believe that everyone is entitled to pick a candidate by whatever method suits them (I had a theory about tie-color for a while, but it seems they caught on to that one), I don’t know that this girl’s mind is straight on this issue. If one has issues with a candidate, fine – don’t vote for that candidate. But I don’t agree with the practice of voting AGAINST a candidate. I don’t think that one should vote for someone simply because they don’t like the other guy (in the least, you should like the guy you vote for more than the guy you vote against).
So if she truly IS a staunch Democrat, voting Republican out of spite towards the Democratic candidate doesn’t really make sense. It is like switching from Oreo’s to Chips Ahoy because you are mad that they started putting less cream in Oreo’s (this didn’t actually happen to my knowledge – this is just an analogy … I could go for some cookies) – sure you might be making a statement against Oreo’s, but you are now completely depriving yourself of cream. And for all you know, if Chips Ahoy surpasses Oreo’s in sales, they could enact policies that reduce cream availablility even further and even cause all cookie prices to double to fund misguided efforts to build new cookie factories in areas that are currently on fire. (too far? maybe)
Anyway, I worry that there are enough misguided individuals like Ms. Joyce out there in the heartland that yet a 3rd election could go in a direction that I personally feel defies logic. I hope that this time, I’m wrong. But I’ve been unpleasantly disappointed more than once already.
Harsh. Too harsh. While I agree that this woman (woman…not girl…because based on your assertation here, I would have to call you a boy….. the below the belt attack is something a 10 year old boy would pull off) didn’t make much sense and that I think her ideals are misplaced and they frustrated me, I think that your personal and public attack is too much. She can’t defend herself here, and you are hiding behind your blog. I don’t agree with her, but I feel that she is so disenfranchised by her own party that she is rather emotional about it. If you want to engage her in a debate, so be it. Invite her to it. There is a much better way of getting your point across than a public calling out of a private citizen. Besides, I think that you are making her point for her.