Wow, amazing. People give an opinion about you giving an opinion and suddenly we are all monsters? If you don't like someone, fine. If you want to tell everyone else about it, then you should not be shocked when people respond. It is called conversation. Why write another piece? Do you think everyone will go all fuzzy on you now. Peace to you and congratulations and good luck in your new home.

I agree with GaiaTerra7. I'd also like to point out that most of the negative comments I read (and which I agree with) concerned how poorly written the article was. It simply wasn't a good read, regardless of its opinion and many commenters made the point that they expect a higher quality of writing on The Daily Beast.

Good job, Wendy. I commented in support of your first article. At the end, I too observed that your comments would unleash a string of animosity. I am a middle of the road kind of guy. I love to read differing opinions on a myriad of topics. I find myself generally more conservative on financial issues and more liberal on humanitarian issues. I sincerely enjoy hearing someone express their reasons for holding to their opinions - even if they differ subatantially from my own. To that end, I enjoyed your article, your rationale, and the expression of your feelings.

The comments I read in response to your prior article simply reinforced my prior observations over the years regarding those who hold extreme views. Whether to the right or to the left, they become inflexible, dogmatic, and highly reactionary toward anyone who dares to differ. This election has tended to polarize people away from the middle, which means it has created more fanatics than we normally have in society. I see that Obama's side is just as guilty as McCain's. There will be no winner this election, just a surviving loser and for that, I am sincerely sad.

Bravo Wendy! The fringe fanatics should read Voltaire - who would disagree but defend to the death your right to speak freedy/ But he's French and since there;
's no tolerance for the French (remember the screams on the right?), so Madison or Lincoln would do.

Wendy is correct that we should respect her opinion.
I sincerely do.

However, she errs in thinking that hers is as significant as the space she takes to give it.

Ohmigod there is so much drama in Wendy Button's life! For NO REASON!!! Shame on you all and Barack Obama and also Sexism because you got her fired and made her vote for John McCain.

While I felt that Ms. Button's open letter seemed disingenuous at best, I can't understand why anyone would lash out the way many apparently have. Criticize her points or motivations, but why would anyone feel the need to threaten her physically.

I agree with you on at least one point Wendy, I also feel that the left is supposed to be the side of understanding. Just because the other team fights with hate and ugliness gives us no excuse to adopt those same tactics.

While I still question your motivation for the original piece, I offer you my apology for the unnecessary pitchforks and lit torches that have been swung at you.

We should all abhor those that threaten violence in response to an individual's political beliefs in any situation, from any point on the ideological spectrum.

That said, most of the criticisms made of the original article seemed to have less to do with "stepping out of party line" or "betrayal" as they were serious reflections on the logic behind Ms. Button's decision to vote for McCain/Palin rather than the Democratic ticket. I believe that had she declared herself uncomfortable with the Obama/Biden platform and decided to abstain from voting all together, it would have been easier to swallow for most of this site's readers.

Instead, Ms. Button decided to support the ticket of the party that has routinely dismissed the rights and the respect worthy of the middle and lower class; the party that has, as one of its core tenets, a penchant for tailoring policies to cater to the wishes of the extremely wealthy, ignoring everyone else in the process. Ms. Button charges the Democratic Party with sexism, but finds it very easy to support a ticket that picked a vice presidential candidate out of blatantly sexist motivations. She disagrees with the Democratic position on the Iraq war, but will vote for an openly war-hungry hawk that would leave troops there indefinitely and likely start another confrontation with Iran.

Ms. Button, the indignation expressed here and elsewhere is not the result of hurt feelings and abandonment. It is a commentary on the wildly hypocritical stance you have chosen to take, on your decision to throw away all of your principles and support a candidate that cares nothing about the values you claim to hold dear. You may be uncomfortable with Barack Obama and Joe Biden, but to take that discomfort and turn it into support for a ticket that deviates even more drastically from what you purport to believe is confusing and appalling.

Isn't the Democratic Party supposed to be one of tolerance - of embracing those who are not the same as us? I am utterly disgusted and ashamed that these hypocritical party supporters who are are in fact just as closed-minded, bigoted, and cruel as our Conservative counterparts. Having the freedom to choose who we vote for and support is part of what makes this country great. Having freedom of the press and freedom of speech should never be contingent on the message. And if you support those freedoms, you should never be threatening one who is exercising those freedoms, even if you disagree with them. And for those people who are refusing to ever speak to her again - good riddance to such close-minded "friends".

GaiaTerra7: the issue is not that people responded, it's the tone of the responses. To be clear, I though Button's original post was logically weak. But responses should contribute to the dialogue; death threats or name-calling are not only lame in general, they're especially hypocritical when they come from Obama's supporters. Obama, you may recall, insists that "we can disagree without being disagreeable".

Ms. Button is shocked.......Schlocked is more like it. When you throw out red meat the wolves don't differentiate according to party.

I registered in order to leave a comment. Wendy, though I too have been registered as an independent since the start, I feel a bit of an obligation to apologize on the behalf of all of those who have threatened you.

I do this not out of a feeling of guilt, more so the knowledge that those who have threatened you have stolen some of the dignity that comes with being a human being and interacting in a civil society.

So, I'm sorry there are people who don't know how to disagree. Their parents probably never taught them to share, or to disagree with dignity. It is ironic that (honest or not) Senator Obama tells those at his rally who boo Senator McCain to just go out and vote as opposed to booing and then we find this kind of disgusting hate following your rather personal article.

I don't agree with everything you said, but I support your right to say it without reserve.

Well, Ms. Button, it is too bad that people have been levying death threats and the like against you. Unfortunately, there are crazies on both sides. All that said, I still take issue with your original essay. All those words and precious few good reasons for supporting John McCain. All I can take from today's post is that you think the Democrats are sexist and unfair to working people, while the Republicans are more supportive. Really? Somehow amongst all the billions in tax breaks for millionaires and beat-downs on workplace unionization, I missed that. Well, good luck.. methinks you'll need it.

Geez. Here we go again. Please just go away.

GaiaTerra7,
I'm not sure you read the entire piece, but I could have swore it started off with her receiving threats and the like. Not sure that would qualify as "conversation" in most people's eyes.

Wendy never says she's voting for McCain...how about correcting that Tina instead of perpetuating that...

What I don't understand, Ms. Button, is how a vote for John McCain makes everything better. How did you support John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, only to suddenly decide that their ideas and policies would best be served by electing a Republican? I'm confused. What about the attack ads by the McCain/Palin campaign? Have these escaped your notice?

Against McCain and against Palin, the Obama/Biden campaign has attacked on the basis of policy, voting history, political connections and their opponents own words. Those opponents, on the other hand, have attacked based on rumor and innuendo, personal affiliations and out-and-out falsehood. Obama didn't force Sarah Palin to wear the expensive department store wardrobe while spouting her "plain-Jane, Real America" credentials. Obama didn't force John McCain to vote in support of Bush policies (although he certainly joined in support of so many of them). Obama didn't use any mind-magic to cause Palin to become confused about the Vice President's job description.

I'll be the first to agree that the Democrats are a rat-infested and leaking ship. That still doesn't make it any smarter to jump ship and take your chances on the volcanic island full of cannibals that is the Republican Party.

I find it strange that when you make it clear that you wish to fight for same-sex rights and choice, that you are willing to switch sides to one that is defined by the opposite, regardless of your disgust with parts of the Democratic party. I mean, even if you percieve less corruption and issues within the Republican party, ultimately they still fundamentally disagree with your viewpoint. I suppose you could fight to bring the Republican banner under fiscal and governmental conservatism instead of the social conservatism it currently lives and breathes, but it seems pretty unlikely unless the party totally collapses after this election.

As for those muttering death threats and exhibiting harm towards you -- are you suddenly surprised to see this on both sides of the fence? It's been like this for years. There's no excuse for that sort of behaviour, of course. It is a result, however, of language of the Republican campaign that appeal to the xenophobic side of the masses. One side becomes jingoistic and the other side becomes as extreme in response!

Personally, I really don't care that you're voting for McCain; what I cared about was a person deeply involved in politics writing a very scattershot piece which spoke more to her bitterness than actual issues (in my opinion). I feel like the arguments you make about Democrats could also be made for Republicans. You talk about sexism, but what about the racism? Remember the 'terrorist fist jab'? Like most elections, there has been a lot of crap said.

I suppose I just hoped a political speechwriter had deeper reasons for switching sides...but it reads like any random person's blog. I guess we're not all that different...

And all that being said, I'm glad this is a website that has a wide range of political opinions. One-sided discussions are awful on either side of the political spectrum.

First, you should call everyone who tried to stop you from posting "So Long, Democrats" and apologize for not heeding their excellent advice.

Second, you should realize that your allegiance, apparently, was to John Edwards, personally, and not the Democratic party.

Third, recognize that your thinking is obviously juvenile. There are numerous examples in your "So Long, Democrats" article, but this one will suffice:

"Our economy is in the tank for many complicated reasons, especially because people don't have enough money. So let them keep it. Let businesses keep it so they can create jobs and stay here and weather this storm."

To be a more honest journalist, I think you should, after the word "reasons", insert the phrase "which I can't begin to comprehend". Then you could extend your "let them keep it" proposal with the fact that all taxes in some way, diminish the amount of someone's pocket money, so why pay taxes at all? Why don't we just harvest moonbeams to run the government and pay off mortgages with hugs?

ps - It is not your opinion that I take exception to, even though I don't agree with it. Rather it is the unformed and uninformed utterances with which you attempt to support your opinon. It would have been every bit as meaningful to say "Because I feel like it!" and let it go at that.

Differing political views aside, I am pretty sure the majority of the criticism was aimed at Button's weak writing and how on earth it was approved for publication by Tina Brown in the first place.

The main narrative here is not about politics. It is about a woman who feels a sense of 'career failure' and out of 'desparation' makes an attempt at 'retribution' by taking a controversial and (logically weak) 'position.'
I know how to be a name, she says, I've seen it done before.
She cries foul at the dems during their peak!
Thankfully we have 'the new technology.'
But she cries foul on us for disagreeing with her and pointing out the shortcomings of her peice!
This is the 'new politics.'
The 'crazies' are in the masthead. They're good for traffic.

Dear Daily Beast, the comments to Wendy's original piece indicate the readers' rejection of Wendy's writing. Please stop allowing her to put more of it on this site. This isn't about politics. This is about writing. Thank you.

My problem with it was that it was not only banal but also inconsistent and uniquely self absorbed. My question was about the level of your professional skills and your general competence to be a writer for others, but not because your views are different from mine.

Enjoy your 15 seconds of fame.

There is no question that the divisive nature of this campaign has exceeded what most of us consider reasonable, and as a Hillary supporter I completely understand what your friend's daughter felt like. There is no room for discussion among New Yorkers on the subject of Barack Obama, which is one of the reasons I started logging on to this site. Having said that, I don't take issue with your switiching gears in this process, but I do question the logic of your reasons. For anyone who questioned or criticized Joe the Plumber, there were and are thousands who question the patriotism of anyone who doesn't happen to live in a small town, and no one has been more provocative and divisive in public arenas on that score than Palin. Regarding sexism, it goes both ways-Palin's being exploited by her own party and just because it's backfiring, they want to cry foul against a sexist media. I don't recall any cries of indignation coming from anyone but Hillary herself, when David Schuster accused her of pimping her daughter on the campaign trail! Again, I just don't follow your logic. Switch allegiance on issues, ok, but where dirty pool is concerned, it's hard to defend one side against the other.