Why Hillary Clinton should stay in the race
If, by then, no mistake or disclosure had wounded Obama seriously, she should make a graceful concession speech before the convention and raise her arms aloft with Obama for benefit of both media and the electorate. That would launch the convention on a positive note of unity. It also would provide her with a jumping-off place for national campaigning this fall, on behalf of Obama, and a platform for a future presidential candidacy, if she sought it.
I want Obama both to be nominated and elected president. But there is no reason Clinton should be pushed prematurely off a stage on which her vote-getting power has earned her a place.
Meantime, there are congressional races
I believe the Democratic presidential nominee is likely to defeat Sen. John McCain handily. McCain has not yet defined himself for the electorate and, at this late date, lacks a firm base in his own Republican Party. President Bush's low approval ratings do not automatically rub off on McCain. But they are not helping him. McCain, meantime, clearly is uncomfortable trying to find a proper yet respectful distance from the expiring administration.
In congressional races, there is little good news for Republicans thus far. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia went so far last week as to call for an "emergency members-only meeting" of House Republicans to discuss "a catastrophic collapse of trust in Republicans."
Democrats recently took two previously Republican House seats — formerly held by retired Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois and retired Louisiana Rep. Richard Baker. The losses, in normally conservative districts, appear to be omens of November outcomes. Recent national polling data show Democrats generically favored over Republicans, 50 percent to 32 percent, in this fall's congressional elections. That margin is comparable to the one prevailing during President Nixon's Watergate crisis.
Six Republican Senate seats were lost in 2006. Race-by-race analysis in 2008 points to Democratic gains of another couple seats this fall. Should the Democratic presidential candidate defeat McCain, and the present congressional outlook hold, Democrats in the White House and on Capitol Hill would be able to dominate the public agenda, if not pass all their legislative proposals. Their victory would not approach the magnitude of President Johnson's landslide 1964 victory over Sen. Barry Goldwater, which made possible 1965 passage of historic Great Society legislation. But it put Democrats unmistakeably in charge.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Tue, May 13, 10:29 p.m. inappropriate
Stay in but stay positive: I think you're right - at this point, Clinton needs to reach the finish line, wherever that line may be. Given how close this one is, the winner needs to be decided clearly and fairly. A premature exit by Clinton would certainly alienate some Democrats who might otherwise suck up a tough loss and rally around Obama.
Your point about keeping our options open if Obama's campaign implodes in the next month (as unlikely as that seems) is also valid.
At this point, however, Clinton's campaign strategy needs to put the interests of the team ahead of her long shot at winning. Without question, her negative campaign and her appropriation of conservative talking points have damaged the party. Yes, Obama needs to learn how to play rough, and Clinton has given him plenty of practice. However, tactics such as leaking the "bitter" comment have done real and lasting damage to Obama and have provided McCain with powerful ammunition that he wouldn't have otherwise had. If she continues this approach, she would either win the primary in a way that would truly divide the party, or she would lose and leave Democrats with a greatly weakened contender.
Posted Wed, May 14, 6:55 a.m. inappropriate
For her own sake she should leave gracefully now: Interesting points, but when I see the spectacle of Hillary Clinton, former admirer of Eleanor Roosevelt, now happily exploiting the racism of some of her supporters, I think she's already been in this campaign far too long for her own good.
I'd love to admire her. It gives me no joy to compare her to Obama and feel appalled at the difference between their evident notions of leadership, and morality. For example, Obama has called out Christian African-American audiences about their homophobia. That's what I think of as leadership--courageously challenging people to do their best, even to grow. Courage is infectious, and we need a big dose of it in this country.
Can you imagine Hillary Clinton speaking to her Appalachian supporters about racism, challenging them in a respectful but strong way to widen their worlds and take responsibility for their own fears? It's not respectful to them to simply exploit their fears and their worst instincts--which we all have in one way or another. But to really try to lead these folks would take courage, it would involve risk, and evidently this smart and I believe once-principled woman would rather play up to their pathology than try to lead them.
I think she's lost all moral compass, and it would be better for everyone if she left the stage as soon as possible.
Posted Wed, May 14, 4:55 p.m. inappropriate
double standard: The overall media manipulation of the campaign beginning 6 months before the primaries has been stunning. First, John Edwards was basically denied major media coverage despite his appeal and his strong performance in Iowa. Next, Hillary was basically told to get out of the race as early as New Hampshire and the calls for her to leave the race and the near hysterical critiques of her campaign attack against Obama have been deafening. Obama has had adulatory coverage for a year, unheard of. As someone who is not a big Clinton fan, I have come to admire Hillary's toughness and tenacity in the face of incredible and unfair negative media. She could more than go toe to toe with McCain.
What's going on is that the McGovern Democrats (who have a stellar record at winning presidential elections) have never liked the Clintons with some justifiable cause and they have seen Obama as a way towards pay-back against the Clintons. They have combined with media on the right who view Obama as more defeatable than Clinton. Thus a potential reason for the easy ride Obama has enjoyed.
We've heard the old joke, I don't belong to an organized political party - I'm a Democrat. But how true it is - we Democrats really don't know how to come together. I have a lot of skepticism about Obama's ability to defeat McCain and it is a joke to berate Hillary for her campaign tactics for they are perfectly gentel when compared to the 'swift boat' attacks that Obama will face in the open waters. I hope the McGovern Democrats know what they're doing - unfortunately, their track record is far from encouraging.
Posted Wed, May 14, 9:57 p.m. inappropriate
RE: double standard: When you say "McGovern Democrats", who exactly are you referring to, senior citizens? My impression was that the elderly were leaning towards Hillary.
As for your theory about Obama support being all about payback to the Clintons, I disagree. I think most Obama supporters (myself included) like him because they see him as the Bill Clinton of this race, while the only similarity they can see between Bill and Hillary is the last name.
Posted Thu, May 15, 9:22 a.m. inappropriate
RE: double standard: The "Bill Clinton of his race"? Man, you really know how to insult someone.
Posted Thu, May 15, 2:50 p.m. inappropriate
RE: double standard: Re-read the previous post more carefully: "The Bill Clinton of THIS race."
Posted Sun, May 18, 11:45 a.m. inappropriate
Another Viewpoint: "The Clintons' 2008 playing of the race card, "
Nasty, snarky, and dangerously untruthful statement. There is proof positive, thanks to Obama campaign strategy memos, that it was their intention to play the race victim all along, in order to solidify black support.
Senator Clinton mentioning that it took not only the vision and dedication of a MLK, but also the leadership and political know-how of an LBJ to get the Civil Rights Act passed was the truth. It was not a slam against MLK, it was not a racist slur. For Senator Obama to declare Senator Clinton, and Representative Ferraro, and former President Clinton and his own grandmother all racists is self-serving political cynicsm at its worst.
Obama wants it both ways: mention the word "white" and you are a racist; mention the word "whitey" and you are a trusted, respected, patriotic but misunderstood minister.
Trusted and respected that is, until that minister "insulted" Obama by labeling him as a politician. Zap!
"He has run a notably positive campaign. Not easy to charge him with smearing Hillary unfairly."
Have you been listening? Senator Obama has consistently belittled, dismissed, and lampooned Clinton. For brevity's sake I will merely list words and phrases spoken by Obama about Clinton. If you would like the list of citations, I will be happy to supply them.
Backbiting, bitter, falsehoods, would like to have the voters silenced, poor judgments, may have had something to do with Bhutto's assassination, secretive, desperate, negative, phony, ducking and dodging, calculation and evasion, hedge and dodge and spin, disingenuous, special-interest obsession, not forthright, calculating, unprincipled, vague, willing to say anything, all about deceit, not straight with the American people, fear-mongering, politics as usual.
And I am only up to January!
I am not declaring that no opponent-bashing should take place during campaigns; some of it is rather amusing. But do not for a moment believe that Barack Obama is "above politics as usual" or that he is anything but a politician.
An inexperienced one, an overly ambitious one, and one who counts on folks like you believing everything he pretends to be.
Did you believe him when he said "I will serve out my full six year term." ?
The last time he said that was in November of 2006. In February of 2007 he declared his candidacy.
His site was created on October of 2006, the month before he was still promising to serve out his full term.