Hillary's Moral Conundrum

NewsBlurbs
The Armchair Curmudgeon
Feb 16, 2007


In a message dated 2/16/2007 6:02:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, Hubmaster writes:
Here's the moral conundrum...

A recent Marist poll showed that 47% of the electorate will not vote for Hillary under any conditions no matter what!

Think about that!

If Hillary is the acknowledged front runner, does not that raise a moral dilemna.

If you know that you cannot win with such odds against you, would it not be morally the right thing to do to back out and leave the high ground to someone else? And show that you are more interested in your party than you are in your own plans?

If Hillary understands that 47% of the electorate will not vote for her, and she is unwilling to accommodate the needs of her party for a "winner," is she not subverting the best interests of her party for her own ego needs, spearheading its destruction??? Can the Democratic Party even survive another loss?

Don't get me wrong: This is not subjective: The Marist Poll is legitimate with a small projectable error and is determined on voter attitudes and preferences . With 47% guaranteed "no's" where does that leave the candidate? Where does that leave the democratic party?.

Hillary may be good and great. But if she can't win, she should get out of the way and let somebody else try...

That's the view of the Armchair Curmudgeon...

Les Aaron
The Armchair Curmudgeon