I was surprised, and pleased at the timing. Because his endorsement now wasn't, "Vote for Obama in the primaries" it was, "Obama has won the nomination." (Which is true as far as I can tell -- what would Clinton need to win to pull ahead, 90% of the remaining vote? Something implausible, anyway.)
This is silly. Edwards is so cuddly, how can he bring the angry votes?
The offensive part about that characterization is that it does what they usually do when they don't want to deal with the legitimate grievances any group may have: they make it about the anger, rather than the legitimate reasons people might be angry. Because clearly, being upset about poverty, lack of healthcare, and Iraq is a matter of being emotionally unbalanced. And they make it a demographic thing: "angry black man," "angry chick rock", to encourage people to fear or dismiss the problems.
Comments 6
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
The offensive part about that characterization is that it does what they usually do when they don't want to deal with the legitimate grievances any group may have: they make it about the anger, rather than the legitimate reasons people might be angry. Because clearly, being upset about poverty, lack of healthcare, and Iraq is a matter of being emotionally unbalanced. And they make it a demographic thing: "angry black man," "angry chick rock", to encourage people to fear or dismiss the problems.
Reply
Leave a comment