CAMPAIGN OUTSIDER Should she stay or should she go?
By Muhammad Cohen
Senator Barack Obama says rival Senator Hillary Clinton "can run as long as she
wants", but many of his supporters are calling for the former frontrunner to
drop out of the race. Clinton takes the calls as evidence that she still has a
chance to win the Democratic presidential nomination, despite overwhelming
evidence to the contrary.
Even Obama admits this race, which got underway a year ago and awarded its
first delegates three months ago - it only seems like years - may have dragged
a bit. "It's like a good movie that's gone one half an hour too long," the
Illinois senator and frontrunner said. But Clinton alone can decide when it's
time to
wrap the shoot, and everyone on the Democratic side needs to stay in focus.
The case for Clinton to exit gracefully is clear. She has won fewer votes,
fewer pledged delegates, and fewer states than Obama. Clinton supporters
contend the count doesn't matter until voters in the remaining primaries,
including key swing state of Pennsylvania on April 22, have spoken. But barring
a miracle as big as the parting of James Carville's hair, Clinton cannot
overcome Obama's leads in any of those categories.
In this front loaded primary year, just 10 states still have contests ahead.
The New York senator keeps reminding us that Bill Clinton didn't wrap up the
necessary delegates for his nomination until early June, but in 1992 there were
more than 20 states still to vote at this point. Moreover, despite the lack of
metaphysical certainty until that late date, Bill Clinton had no serious rival
in 1992 once Paul Tsongas - of Pander Bear fame - dropped out in March.
New math Hillary Clinton has limited options for upsetting the prevailing
mathematics in 2008. Her best chance is convincing Democratic convention
delegates they should select her despite the verdict of the voters by beating
Obama's negatives down to her level. Last week, caught in a fat lie about
landing under sniper fire in Bosnia, Clinton finally told the world what she
thought about Obama's former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who said a lot
of things most Americans, especially white ones, find offensive. Polls say that
Clinton's Obama-bashing is not having the desired effect, however.
Surveys taken before and after the Wright controversy indicate that Obama's
negatives have barely moved while Clinton's have increased significantly.
Voters apparently blame Clinton for the destructive tone of the campaign,
though it remains mannerly compared to what's likely in the general election
contest.
It may be that voters accept Obama's thoughtful, nuanced message about race in
his historic speech two weeks ago. But given the lack of news coverage and
apparent grassroots signs, it's unlikely that a great American dialogue on race
has begun. It's more likely that voters are trailing the punditocracy on
awareness of the campaign in general and the Wright issue in particular.
Another poll shows one in five voters believe Obama is a Muslim; it's hard for
them to get (more) angry about Wright until they can hardwire this Christian
preacher's connection to Obama.
Keep in mind also that polls have missed plenty this year - see the Democratic
Primary, New Hampshire. It's hard to believe that Wright and other negatives
Clinton raises aren't hurting Obama with voters now. In the general election,
Republican John McCain has pledged to take the high road. But in a race against
Obama, expect McCain's surrogates and independent groups to make Wright's "God
damn America" the catchphrase of the election. If Clinton is the nominee,
Republicans will call her a racist.
Bring it on! Certainly Obama (or Clinton, if she was the frontrunner with the
insurmountable lead) would benefit from running against McCain full-time. It's
true that running against each other prepares the candidates for facing McCain.
But, after all their practice, just running against McCain, and just raising
funds to pay for running against him, would be more effective than further
warming up.
By raising Obama's negatives, Clinton hopes for big wins in the remaining
states to show that, even if she doesn't have the numbers over the long haul,
she has the momentum. Forget that the general election will be more than five
months after the last primary, making that momentum inconsequential.
Any winning scenario for Clinton means overruling the will of the primary
electorate. The superdelegates were created to provide that safety valve in
case the party electorate lost its mind and chose a sure loser (though I'd like
to know who Democratic elders would have nominated in 1972 instead of George
McGovern). Nominating Obama, chosen in contests with record turnouts in which
he legitimately beat the pregame favorite, hardly seems to call for that kind
of drastic step.
Superdelegates overturning the primary results could cause a backlash among
rank and file Democrats and give the Republicans an issue to exploit. The same
logic that warns Democrats against letting Clinton win in the backrooms also
dictates the process must play it out to remove any suspicions about the
legitimacy of the winner.
Clinton should stay in the race until she is good and ready to get out; it
can't look as if she was pushed. If that means a convention floor flight over
the seating of the Michigan and Florida delegations (selected in unsanctioned
primaries), so be it. Better still would be for both sides to pressure the
Democratic national committee to find a scenario to create valid results in
those two big states.
How, not who If Democrats care about winning in November, what matters most isn't
who gets the nomination but that the contest seems honest to party faithful and
independents. A whiff that the winning side dirty-tricked its way to the
nomination gives Republicans an issue to exploit.
Schooled by Karl Rove, the Republicans have developed a preternatural ability
to make their weakness the opponent's weakness: remember patriotic National
Guard draft dodger George W Bush versus decorated Vietnam War "traitor" John
Kerry? The party that won the presidency by stopping the vote count in Florida
in 2000 will accuse the Democrats of being anti-democratic in 2008.
The fiasco over the Michigan and Florida primaries already has this issue on
the radar, but it's too complex for clever soundbites and ads. A nomination
decided by Washington insiders in smoky backrooms or lawyers challenging the
party rules at the convention or in court would be simple for Republicans to
present and for voters to resent.
So Democrats need to fight it out until all sides agree someone has won fair
and square. Rather than trying to push Clinton out, Obama must ensure Clinton
can't claim any legitimacy by extending his lead in pledged delegates and
popular votes. If all these politicos who say Clinton should quit would spend a
day stumping for Obama in Pennsylvania or North Carolina or Indiana, they would
do him far more good.
Calls for Clinton to drop out also reflect a well-earned lack of
self-confidence among Democrats. Losing twice to George W Bush will do that.
McCain is a formidable candidate but the tea leaves still favor the Democrats,
whoever the nominee is. The sitting two-term Republican president is very
unpopular, the economy is tanking, and the Basra eruption in southern Iraq is a
reminder of how McCain's "we're winning in Iraq" case could - pardon the
expression - blow up in his face.
McCain's campaign was no juggernaut in the primaries and seems to be
squandering its current free ride, playing to its strengths in foreign affairs
rather than trying to expand the Arizona senator's appeal. A listening tour
focused on the economy would be far more effective than McCain telling war
stories about his service career, though a stop in Hanoi in Vietnam for a
little mutual forgiveness would be an inspired touch.
If the Democrats run the better general election campaign for a legitimately
chosen candidate, they will win. The key to doing that isn't ending the
nomination contest now, but offering better answers on Iraq and the economy. So
far, that race wide looks wide open.
Former broadcast news producer Muhammad Cohen told America’s
story to the world as a US diplomat and is author of
Hong Kong On Air (www.hongkongonair.com),
a novel set during the 1997 handover about television news, love, betrayal,
high finance and cheap lingerie.
(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
for information on
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
