I was talking about this earlier in the evening with my friend Stuart. It still feels like a thought-in-progress. He asked me who I would be voting for in the Oregon primary, Clinton or Obama. I answered, honestly, that I don't know. But I did bring up something that's perplexing me.
There seems to be a lot of anti-Clinton feeling out there right now and I'm not sure where it comes from, though I have my suspicions. Up until, what, a year-and-a-half ago, the name Clinton was a byword for "better times." Now liberals who support Obama can't heap enough scorn on both Hilary and Bill Clinton -- and his presidency. I admit that there are some unsavory elements to their relationship (as if that's any business of ours) and to their rather naked ambition for power (as if anyone in politics at that level is free from that taint).
I wonder if this invective is simply part of the American political system. It's not enough that the candidate you like well, but their opponent must be destroyed. I have a feeling that if Clinton had remained in the background (where I'm pretty sure she could have acted as king-maker during the convention) she'd still be admired, but because she is in the race, those who like her opponent have to vilify her. I'm sure she was expecting this behavior from Republicans, but I wondered if she expected it from her own party?
And I will admit that I am no wonk, not by any stretch of the imagination. And as I've already said, I haven't decided on who I will support in the primary (if my support even means anything by the time our primary comes around). I just felt the need to comment on the situation and to try and figure out its cause.
I swear I won't do things like this very often.