Various Notions, Volume 4: Let the Fight Carry On...and On, and On; Soon-Irrelevant Primary Predictions; Boris's Big Johnson

GOING, GOING...GUAM

My previous position regarding the status of the Democratic race through the "final" contests, in Montana and South Dakota, on June 3 has solidified:  both Senators Clinton and Obama should stay in the race, campaigning in every state (of which several remain) and commonwealth territory (Puerto Rico has yet to vote), in order to put to rest any "could have beens" that could arise from Senator Clinton leaving the race sometime this month.  (I put "final" in quotation marks, by the way, because how to deal with the previously-bogus Florida and Michigan contests, and therefore their delegates, is still an open question).

It wasn't as though I needed much prompting to solidify my "all-the-way-to-June-3" stance; I have written about it on a few other occasions, both on this and other blog-sites.  But, odd as it is to say, the results this past weekend in, uh, Guam, forced my previously "still-somewhat-fluid" opinion into the "solid" category.  But why has this happened in the wake of the Guam caucuses, and why now?

A lot of it has to do with where we are in the calendar right now--it is currently slightly less than a month until June 3.  This race has gone on for a long, long time (it started after the election returns came in during the 2006 mid-term elections, though it started in earnest a couple of months later), so what's wrong with carrying on for a month and discovering exactly how each state votes, rather than postulating "how things could have been" if one of the two remaining candidates were to drop out?  Why not cross the finish line, as long as we're around the final bend?

Of course, it could turn out that, once we cross the finish line, the rules have been changed and we find that we've got another few laps to go.  This could make the general atmosphere far nastier than it is at present.  So the best result would be for the Clinton and Obama camps to meet during the week following the June 3 contests in order to broker a deal that would have one or the other candidate dropping-out in the interests of party loyalty and, most of all, creating a winning ticket for November.

In this scenario, Senator Clinton would most likely drop out (she's still behind Senator Obama in the overall delegate count by a not insubstantial margin), and be awarded for it.  I would suggest pressuring Harry Reid to step down as the Senate Majority Leader and giving the position to her, which would mean that she comes out of this election cycle in a stronger political position than she possessed prior to entering it, and it means that if Senator Obama loses the general election, she will (at least technically) have more authority in the U.S. legislature than he will.  If things look dire for her candidacy come June 4, this offer might entice Senator Clinton.  It would also allow Senator Obama to choose someone else to be his running mate without creating catastrophic damage to the Democrats' chances in November.

If, on the other hand, Senator Clinton begins to steam-roll through states, winning just about everywhere after the Indiana and North Carolina contests (which would include Clinton-friendly states such as Kentucky and West Virginia, Obama-friendly states such as Oregon and Montana, and the wild-card contests in South Dakota and Puerto Rico), she might find herself in a position to at least attempt to offer Senator Obama the Vice Presidential slot, though chances are fifty-fifty that he would accept it.  If he does accept it, they will most likely win the general election in November.  If he does not accept it, he might find himself eyeing the election for the governorship of Illinois, which he would almost surely win, thereby acquiring the chief executive experience he presently lacks, in anticipation of a future White House run.

Of course, these scenarios are not as likely to happen now as they might have seemed to be a few months ago.  No, what is far more likely is that June 4 rolls around and the Clinton and Obama camps dig in for a while, calling the remaining undecided super-delegates incessantly and fighting over the Florida and Michigan messes.  So be it.  That scenario would be far, far less-than-ideal, to be sure, but it isn't as though we haven't seen it before (remember 1960, when John F. Kennedy won the nomination during the convention--and only when he put Lyndon Johnson on the ticket--and then went on to win the White House?).

It would also be far better than the muttering those who strongly support Senator Clinton would do if their candidate dropped out of the race prior to competing in all of the remaining contests, which would surely occur if and when the Obama campaign had an inevitable tough week on the general election campaign trail....  I suggest that this latter scenario would be more damaging insofar as critical demographic turnout on election day is concerned.

So now we come back to Guam, which became the unexpected tipping point for me insofar as the solidification of my mindset is concerned.  But, my goodness, why Guam?  Well, both the Clinton and Obama camps were hoping for a solid victory in that U.S. territory, in order to claim at least a little more momentum going into the Indiana and North Carolina contests (they knew that they could not claim a lot of momentum in the wake of Guam's vote, but every little bit helps in such tight races).

However, the final vote (it was a caucus vote, not a primary vote, and Guam has a small overall population, so the numbers were lower than just about everywhere else) proved much trickier to "spin" than each side had hoped, with Senator Obama receiving 2,264 votes (50.1%) and Senator Clinton receiving 2,257 votes (49.9%).  The margin of "victory" was razor-thin (in this case, just seven votes), and the candidates will be forced to split Guam's delegate votes evenly, which is beginning to look both familiar and indicative of the overall race.

Furthermore, Guam's voting dynamics--the most heavily-populated area leaned toward Clinton, everywhere else leaned toward Obama--were indicative of the overall dynamics of this race, with Senator Clinton having won heavily-populated states such as New York, California, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (and she would surely win Florida), but with Senator Obama having won far more total contests (about thirty or thirty-one) than she has (about fifteen).

Guam is geographically tiny and features an almost statistically insignificant population (when compared to the whole of the U.S.), and it is located in the Pacific Ocean, far from the west coast of the continental United States.  That being said, during this past weekend that "statistically insignificant" population showed everyone how close this race is, both on Guam itself and, in some very real ways, in the country as a whole.

So, Senators Clinton and Obama ought to carry on and keep this going up to and including June 3.  If Senator Obama performs very well over the next month, Senator Clinton may be enticed to drop out at that point, with some more political capital than she had previous to entering the race.  If Senator Clinton performs very well over the next month, the fight may go all the way to the convention in Denver in August, and probably for good reason, because Senator Obama will still most likely lead in the pledged delegate count.

This race has been going on for quite some time now, but it may be only starting.  Let's (try to) enjoy the ride.

NORTH CAROLINA AND INDIANA PRIMARY PREDICTIONS

I'm not one for predicting the outcome of particular primary and/or caucus races, but I notice the that latest blogging fad is for folks who don't live in upcoming election states, and who have not been to them recently, to somehow attempt to predict the outcome of the races held in those states.  Well, who am I to swim against the current, particularly when predicting the outcome of various races is a "win-win" proposition (either you are wrong and blame it on the fact that you're not "on the ground" in those states, which is plausible; or you're right and can claim intellectual fortitude and/or secret knowledge, which is a bit silly but sounds good)?  So, for what it's worth, here goes:

NORTH CAROLINA:   Of late, Senator Clinton has made a somewhat impressive run in North Carolina, cutting Senator Obama's once-sixteen point lead (in several polls) down to about eight points.  That being said, her gas-tax holiday prank seems a bit desperate, and many (though not all) Africa-Americans in North Carolina (African-Americans make up a significant proportion of the Democratic vote in that state) seem to be taking an "Obama at all costs" approach to this primary.  Also, the university-educated crowd, already leaning toward Senator Obama, seems to be sticking with him, at least for the most part, which is a good sign for his campaign, given that North Carolina is an increasingly university-educated state.  (It is certainly not the nearly-universal manufacturing/agricultural state it was several decades ago.)  Clearly Senator Clinton, knowing she will probably lose the popular vote in the Tar Heel state, is simply trying to cut into Senator Obama's delegate haul.  My prediction:  OBAMA BY TEN POINTS.

INDIANA:  Senator Obama will win the vote in the northwestern-most section of the state (in and around the city of Gary), as well as in the capital city of Indianapolis.  Senator Clinton will win most (if not all) everywhere else.  This election, then, may come down to the voters in the Indianapolis suburbs, and I've got to think that with popular former-Indiana Governor and present-U.S. Senator Evan Bayh's unflagging support over the last several weeks, Senator Clinton has got the edge on those voters.  Plus, what happens when a Clinton's back is against the wall and the fire is heading right at her/him, whether that Clinton has the first name of Bill or Hillary?  What happens is that they find a way to stay politically alive...EVERY time.  Senator Clinton will most likely find a way to stay politically alive and relevant this time by winning Indiana in a close vote.  My prediction:  CLINTON BY FOUR POINTS.

THE BLONDE-HAIRED BEHEMOTH OF LONDINIUM

The new Mayor of London, England is Boris Johnson of the Tory Party, who led after ballots were initially counted last Friday, and subsequently came out with a majority of the overall votes after "second-preference" votes were counted.  The final tally, once the various other candidates were removed due to lack of support,  was as follows:  Boris Johnson, 53%; then-Mayor Ken Livingstone, 47%.  This provided the jewel in the electoral crown for Tory Leader David Cameron, who saw his party capture the majority of the 333 (or thereabouts) local council seats lost by Prime Minister Brown's Labour Party during last Thursday's local elections in England and Wales.

For those not "in the know" regarding Mr. Johnson, well, he's technically both American and British (as he was born in New York City), he's highly-educated, and he's given to suggesting that if men vote for the Tories their wives will magically acquire "bigger breasts."  (This will evidently not be the case, at least in his mind, for folks who choose to vote for another party, or abstain from voting altogether.  As to what beneficial things will happen if women vote for the Tories, well, he seems a bit hesitant to openly conceptualize.)

And now-Mayor Johnson's hair "style" is another story altogether....  Yet there is something incredibly, almost rebelliously ingratiating about this rather eccentric, Silver-Spoon-fed politician.  For instance, he seems to have crafted a method of circumventing damaging criticism by making off-the-wall statements in an off-handed manner in public on a consistent basis, as if to show that he's too cool to believe what he's saying and way too cool to care about criticism of what he says.

And John McCain fancies himself a "maverick"....