Posts
So why did the Democratic Party Higher ups secretly plot against Hillary Clinton during the 2008 presidential election? They believed their chances of retaining their own position in Congress would be strengthened if Barack Obama was elected instead of Hillary Clinton.
The problem with this type of me first, the country second position is two fold. First, it is really selfish to care about one's own political career to the point where you only support a presidential candidate based on a mythical belief that one presidential candidate's speech making ability will help keep you in your office.
Just because a politician may like one candidate's "charisma" more than another, is that enough? "I like this candidate, therefore he will help me keep my seat in Congress?" The answer is a resounding, of course not.
Reason number two on why it is an unknown as to which candidate can help keep any politician in their position. There will usually be an inevitable "push back" two years after a new political party gains control of the white house. In recent times, 2 years into the new presidents term the side that lost seats during the presidential election actually will gain some back.
Ironically, what Pelosi and Reid did may actually backfire on them because they may not have supported the best candidate and are more likely to lose their seat, not less likely as a result.
I'm all for that, that's for sure.
As for the PUMA movement, I would love to see PUMA's who don't necessarily agree with each other to at least consider supporting the idea that anyone who deceived Hillary Clinton in 2008 SHOULD NOT be re-elected, even if it means voting republican in those particular instances.
