Overstating the divisions between Democrats

kc — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:18:01 -0800

I keep seeing comments like this made by pundits who wallow in conflict and controversy:

All the king's horses and all the king's men can't put this rainbow back together again. What was once an embarrassment of riches is now, in many ways, just an embarrassment.

Sorry, but these "divided Democrats" stories are just bunk. Yes, there is a very competitive race between Obama and Hillary. Yes, there are some attacks going on on each side.

But people keep forgetting that there is little if any philosophical difference between the Democratic candidates. There are no high-profile Democrats threatening not to support the nominee if their person doesn't win. In the end, there will be a very unified party.

But they say, what about all the racial divisions? Obama won only 30 percent of the white vote in Louisiana!

These same writers keep forgetting that Obama is winning mostly white states like Kansas, Idaho and Alaska by huge margins. To say he can't attract white voters is just BS. All of those white Democrats who aren't voting for Obama in the primary will be voting for him in the general. The Clinton campaign has succeeded in spinning the media with this fairy tale.

If you want divisions, take a look at the GOP. When you have major party leaders and media figures publically dissing presumptive nominee John McCain, even threatening to campaign for Hillary Clinton, now that is some division.

Media organizations like controversy, and they will drum up fake controversies when there are no real ones to exploit.

KirkCaraway.com - Overstating the divisions between Democrats - Comments

Overstating the divisions between Democrats