Fw: Hillary needs your help -- letter to the editor of the Washington Post
Messages
| From: | Liz Nottingham |
| Sent on: | Wednesday, April 30 at 8:52 AM |
----- Original Message -----
From:
mary
Cc:
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 5:23 PM
Subject: Fw: Hillary needs your help -- letter to the editor of the
Washington Post
I receive the updates from a gal...sometimes they
correspond with the Hillary Responders...sometimes not. I didn't see this
come through Hillary Responders...so thought maybe there are some who have not
seen this. I wrote a letter. Perhaps there are others who would like to
write. Can you forward it? My letter is at the end.
Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, April
26, 2008 11:51 AM
Subject: Hillary needs your help -- letter to the editor of the
Washington Post
The next primary is make or break
for Hillary. If she can win Indiana, her chances are very good in the next
few states (West Virginia and Kentucky). The momentum will be
hers. So, I am turning to our best Hillary responders to help change the
outcome of this campaign, by changing the way the media -- and the public --
talks about it!
Just when the media coverage was getting better, the Washington Post has an awful article on the front page.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/25/AR2008042503707.html?hpid=topnews
This will have the effect of drying up donations, making Obama seem inevitable, etc. We need to send letters to the editor to let them know their coverage is biased.
Remember: when sending letters to the editor you'd need to include your name, address and phone number and send it to [address removed]
Here's some possible talking points -- please read the article and then use your own words and send a letter that reflects your views -- otherwise, they will get too many letters saying the same thing. Please don't use all these points, and please add points of your own.
Just when the media coverage was getting better, the Washington Post has an awful article on the front page.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/25/AR2008042503707.html?hpid=topnews
This will have the effect of drying up donations, making Obama seem inevitable, etc. We need to send letters to the editor to let them know their coverage is biased.
Remember: when sending letters to the editor you'd need to include your name, address and phone number and send it to [address removed]
Here's some possible talking points -- please read the article and then use your own words and send a letter that reflects your views -- otherwise, they will get too many letters saying the same thing. Please don't use all these points, and please add points of your own.
---------------- Talking Points
To the editor:
Today's front page article about the Democratic presidential election is biased.
If there are big money donors that used to support Clinton that now support Obama, it is mainly because the media has made it seem like Obama is the inevitable winner.
Why not also talk about the millions of voters who have moved from being undecided to supporting Clinton, as shown in the most recent polls and most recent primaries?
The article says that Clinton has gone negative and that hurts Obama and the Democratic Party. But, Obama has always been negative whenever he said he is the only candidate who voters can trust and the only one who represents the future.
His speech in North Carolina after the debate was much more personally negative than anything Clinton has said.
Obama's real problem is that the media has been so pro-Obama that any problems were ignored. As we learn more about him, many Democrats now realize he has too much bagggage to win the general election.
Stop playing the race card. If you have an article about race, why not talk about the many African Americans working for Hillary, such as her campaign manager. Why don't you interview them?
Signed by YOU, I HOPE!
__________________________________________________________________ My
letter
Not letting voters vote and not counting
all voters is what will truly split the party.
To the Editor:
Is the media and the Obama campaign again stirring
the pot with talk of racial divide? To many it appears that the DNC and
the media long ago had backroom discussions about their candidate of choice
...and it was Obama. Hence, when he started his personal attacks on Sen.
Clinton, there was no outrage. When his campaign charged
"racism" whenever someone questioned his experience, there was no
outrage. When the media attacked her and was so blatantly sexist,
there was no outrage.
But now the DNC and the media see that many
people truly favor Clinton over Obama. And despite their best efforts, his
negatives have come out and the media is exposed for not having done its
job. They now have to drum up fears of a party split and a racial
divide. Believe me, if you continue to hammer away at Sen. Clinton and her
campaign and call for her to drop out, the party will truly be split. And
it won't be because of Sen. Clinton; it will be the fault of the DNC and the
media.
Sen. Clinton is a
viable candidate and by continuing to run she is allowing voters in states which
never have a say...to have a say. She is helping build the party. To
states like Montana, my native state, I know that even in a general election
they don't matter. This year they matter. Every voter matters. And I
do mean every voter including those in Florida and Michigan.
Obama's early wins and "momentum" were based on
"wins" in caucus states. After experiencing here in Texas what a caucus is
like, I'll trust the results of a primary election any day over a
caucus. So let the voters vote and count all votes.
The superdelegates should then decide who is the
better of the two, who won where, how they won (caucus or primary) and who is
better positioned to win in November. If she is shut down now by
Howard Dean, the DNC and a biased media, then surely THEY will have split the
Democratic party.
Respectfully,
XXXXXXXXXXXX