“yadda, yadda, yadda, I’m going to vote for him. & I would have voted for Sen. Clinton”

It’s good to agree sometimes…

To further clarify, in my response to Gilbert about ’04, I worked for Kerry’s campaign. There were plenty of supporters of the other candidates who were not thrilled about supporting Kerry, and some who outwardly made it difficult for him particulary in the blogosphere. I recognize that people will need convincing and I know full well from past experience that that will be a tough undertaking.

The bottomline is however, we can not afford to throw this election away over personal preference.

I do not disagree that whoever is the nominee will need to reach out to the supporters of the other candidate. I have expressed that here in the past. It’s going to take some work on everyone’s part — both candidates and their supporters.

Why would anyone want 4 – 8 more years of republican rule?

That’s a nice sentiment, that everyone should just get behind the nominee, but unfortunately I think Gilbert is right.

I think that we’ve had two candidates who inspire deep feelings of personal attachment to the candidate they’ve supported. Unfortunately the way this primary has gone, combined with those feelings, are going to cause a large number of current Democrats to turn away from the party and not vote for Obama.

Calling it sour grapes won’t woo anyone back. And I think whoever is the nominee and their supporters need to think about how to reach out to those people instead of telling them to buck up and fall in line.

You say:
“Many feel this election was illegitimate.” We need some facts & citations to help us understand this statement. The use of “many” usually implies something that is not there.

You say:
“Contrary to what people have been saying, the more people find out about Obama, the less they like him….”
Again, who are these people, a name would help. & what facts do you have to actually state that “Contrary to what people have been saying.”? Who are the people saying this? I’d like to know.

You say:
“People who have been Dems for 50 years are starting to leave the Party already.”
Who are these people? Where to you get the factual information to back this statement up? Do you get them from blog comments where no one knows the real identity of the commenter? Actually, I’ve been a Democrat for exactly 50 years, although I couldn’t vote until I was 21. I spent a few years learning politics in Madison, Wisco & later in northern Wisco. I’m not leaving the party.

I see you seem to be accepting the finale of this process, that Sen. Clinton has lost, despite your & many others’ hard work. That’s good. I accepted Dodd’s withdrawal, then Edwards’ withdrawal. I know you may join that new party – PUMA – but I hope you don’t. I have to admit, I just never understood this hatred toward Sen. Obama as a person & politician. He, like Sen. Clinton, is a strong centrist who doesn’t really do much for me, but, yadda, yadda, yadda, I’m going to vote for him. & I would have voted for Sen. Clinton.

I hope that Clinton supporters seeing her supporting the nominee will think twice about their sour grapes.

I look back on ’04 and think of my early support for Kerry. If, if he had not been the nominee I would have been crushed, but would have supporterd who ever was. And mind you I was far more vested in Kerry’s campaign than I am now.

People need to realize that is at stake – McCain is not an option.

People who have been Dems for 50 years are starting to leave the Party already. “Party unity” has the potential to permanently fracture the Party by forcing out folks who don’t trust Obama or feel the system has been manipulated. What too many people are missing is that the sentiment felt by many Hillary supporters is not sour grapes that will be healed with time. It’s not.

I think people need to put their presidential candidate personal preferences behind and work towards the greater goal.