Clinton's Last Stand
By Bob Burnett
Created May 8 2008 - 10:15am
Tuesday, May 6th, was the decisive night in the struggle for the
Democratic
nomination. It provided new insight into the character of the two
competitors.
Coming into the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, Hillary Clinton
appeared to have the momentum. Her sup****ters were counting on decisive
victories to prolong her winning streak and give a fundraising boost to a
campaign starved for cash. They believed she could run the deck on the
remaining primaries, close the delegate gap with Barack Obama, and make a
compelling case with the all-im****tant super delegates that Senator
Clinton
had found her voice and, therefore, would prove to be more effective
campaigning against the Republican Candidate, John McCain, in the Fall.
Now, with her big loss in North Carolina, and unexpectedly narrow victory
in
Indiana, all the wind has been taken out of Clinton's sails. This presents
her with three deadly problems: There is no way she can overtake Obama in
either the number of elected delegates or the total popular vote.
Therefore,
there is no effective case she can make to the super delegates. And,
finally, there is no compelling argument she can make to potential donors.
Clinton's bid for the nomination has failed. Sadly, she appears unable to
recognize this reality.
Money Matters. Given Hillary Clinton's name recognition and the active
involvement of former President Bill Clinton, it initially seemed as
though
her victory was inevitable. Her opponents competed against the formidable
Clinton campaign team, one with strong connections to deep-pocket donors
and
the Democratic establishment in every state.
The reason that Senator Obama stayed in the race, and triumphed after
fifteen months, was his ability to raise lots of money. While many will
argue he won because he ran a smarter campaign than Clinton, the big
surprise was that the junior Senator from Illinois, a newcomer to the
national political scene, raised more money than did the Clinton machine.
Now, Democratic power brokers want to close down the battle for the
nomination because they don't want to spend any more money on it, they
would
rather shepherd their resources for the battle in the fall. They sense
Democrats have an op****tunity to substantially increase their majorities
in
the House and Senate - perhaps gain the magical 60-40 majority in the
Senate - and they know it will take a lots money to do that. They've
decided
Obama is a better fundraiser.
Temperament Matters. A famous aphorism is, "Life's a grindstone. Whether
it
wears you down or polishes you up depends upon what you're made of." The
race for the Democratic convention has subjected both Clinton and Obama to
a
political grindstone. After a rocky start where her primary political
persona seemed to be "I'm inevitable," Clinton found her voice and proved
much more effective in the role of "a fighter." Meanwhile, Obama, already
a
skilled orator, became more comfortable with day-to-day campaigning and
learned the little things that often make a big difference; for example,
that he looks much better shooting baskets than he does rolling a bowling
ball.
In the Fall, when Obama faces off against McCain, the temperament of each
candidate will be an im****tant topic. Already articles [1] have suggested
Senator McCain is temperamentally unsuited to be President: a hothead,
someone who carries long-term grudges, perhaps a person who suffers from
PTSD.
During the past fifteen months, we've learned Senator Obama is remarkably
even tempered. His single worst evening was the April 16th debate in
Pennsylvania, where he was attacked not only by Senator Clinton but also
by
the debate moderator Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. While many
observers described Obama's demeanor as "subdued" or "defensive," others
noted that in the middle of a period where he was berated for the comments
of his former pastor and the "bitter" remarks he'd made a few days
earlier,
Obama never lost his temper. But voters noticed and it heightened their
opinion Obama would do better against McCain, provide a more striking
contrast.
During this same extended period voters have had the op****tunity to study
the character of Senator Clinton and have noticed three things: She hasn't
run an effective campaign; her message has been confused and she's written
off states that she shouldn't have. The second is that she and her husband
have on occasion taken the low road - seemingly made the decision that the
ends justified the means - Bill Clinton played the race card in South
Carolina and Hillary Clinton played the pander card in her sup****t for the
gas-tax rebate.
The third thing we've learned is that Senator Clinton places her own
ambition ahead of the best interests of the Democratic Party. That was
apparent in 2006 when, in the middle of an easy race for re-election, she
amassed a huge war chest for her Presidential bid rather than share her
funds with needy Democratic candidates. And it's obvious now, when she has
no chance of becoming the Presidential nominee, when her only motivation
is
self-aggrandizement.
_______
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.
I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an op****tunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are
at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson
|
