Why is Obama’s face all over Clinton’s campaign material?

I don’t think I’ve ever voted in a presidential primary where the vote I cast actually meant anything.  A contested election, in May?  Never heard of it.

But here’s my question for you other states who have already been wooed and forgotten: whose picture was on the campaign materials from Hillary Rodham Clinton?

You would think that it would be her photo, wouldn’t you?  As I live in the northwest corner of Indiana, in one of those “sundown” towns you hear of, and where the once-great city of Gary was torpedoed by white-flight, I wonder why her black male opponent’s photo is on every piece of literature I receive from the Clinton campaign.  Whose strategy is this?

Anyone from a blue state receive stuff like this?  Am I overly sensitive?  You all tell me.

Advertisements

About TinaLBPorter

I write poetry and blog at www.tinalbporter.com. And I'm thrilled to be writing with you.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Why is Obama’s face all over Clinton’s campaign material?

  1. radical mama says:

    I don’t know anything about it. I live in Michigan and Obama did not campaign here. Clinton won by default.

    Like

  2. Jess says:

    No, you’re not overly sensitive. She can’t win on her own merits, so she’s chosen to go negative and use the racial-fear card as much as it takes. They’ve used these mailings in almost every state that has voted so far.

    In the letter that Joe Andrew sent out yesterday announcing his switch from Clinton to Obama, he hit the nail on the head:

    My endorsement of Senator Obama will not be welcome news to my friends and family at the Clinton campaign. If the campaign’s surrogates called Governor Bill Richardson, a respected former member of President Clinton’s cabinet, a “Judas” for endorsing Senator Obama, we can all imagine how they will treat somebody like me. They are the best practitioners of the old politics, so they will no doubt call me a traitor, an opportunist and a hypocrite. I will be branded as disloyal, power-hungry, but most importantly, they will use the exact words that Republicans used to attack me when I was defending President Clinton.

    When they use the same attacks made on me when I was defending them, they prove the callow hypocrisy of the old politics first perfected by Republicans. I am an expert on this because these were the exact tools that I mastered as a campaign volunteer, a campaign manager, a State Party Chair and the National Chair of our Party. I learned the lessons of the tough, right-wing Republicans all too well. I can speak with authority on how to spar with everyone from Lee Atwater to Karl Rove. I understand that, while wrong and pernicious, shallow victory can be achieved through division by semantics and obfuscation. Like many, I succumbed to the addiction of old politics because they are so easy.

    Innuendo is easy. The truth is hard.

    Sound bites are easy. Solutions are hard.

    Spin is simple and easy. Struggling with facts is complicated and hard.

    I have learned the hard way that you can love the candidate and hate the campaign. My stomach churns when I think how my old friends in the Clinton campaign will just pick up the old silly Republican play book and call in the same old artificial attacks and bombardments we have all heard before.

    Like

Comments are closed.