THE BIG QUESTION: WILL THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (EVER) UNITE, AT LEAST UP TO AND INCLUDING ELECTION DAY THIS COMING NOVEMBER?
This, it seems, is the biggest question in this election cycle. Why? Well, recent special elections for U.S. Congressional seats in predominantly Republican districts across the country have seen Democrats win each time, and in impressive manners; and, despite the still-aggressive campaigning being done by both Senators Clinton and Obama and the antipathy toward each of them this has created within sizable percentages of the Democratic party and its natural electorate, polls suggest that both of them are running neck-and-neck nationally with the long-since presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain.
So for Senator McCain to win in November (and Democrats need to be aware that he can still win), the Republicans will need him to appeal both to the political center-ground and the conservative wing of their party, and in addition to that they will need Democratic defections in sizable numbers (given recent heavy party registration going to the Democrats nationwide) in several swing-states across the country. The numbers are the numbers, and they are trending heavily toward the Democrats....
So Senator McCain's camp needs to capitalize on the schism between Senator Obama's supporters and those of Senator Clinton, which means that the McCain camp needs the schism to be at least largely permanent in nature. Of course, some folks will support only Senator Obama or Senator Clinton, but Senator McCain needs the percentages of those suggesting that they will vote for only one or the other Democrat to remain very high, and he needs to "steal" a lot of the votes of Clinton supporters in November (as Senator Obama is on the verge of clinching the number of delegates necessary to win a majority and become his party's nominee).
Will this happen? Will a large percentage of Clinton supporters continue to refuse to back Senator Obama, with some of them staying home on election day and an impressive percentage of them voting for Senator McCain? I tend to think not. I tend to think that this summer we will see a good deal of the Democratic party unite (if perhaps more slowly than many in the Obama camp would like), particularly if and when Senator Clinton concedes graciously--and you can bet that, when the time comes (hopefully soon after the June 3 contests), she will realize that it is in her best political interest to indeed concede graciously, and then to work to help elect Senator Obama in November, in order to avoid looking like she played the role of "spoiler" for the Democrats when all indications are that they have a great chance to win back the White House this year.
But there is still the chance that many of her supporters in places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Wisconsin, Iowa, and (especially) Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and New Hampshire will refuse to vote for Senator Obama. (And what about her fervent supporters in often-Democratic New Jersey?) It is therefore the case that her supporters and admirers may very well ultimately decide this election; we may see many of them vacillate regarding who they intend to support, and therefore emerge as the largest group of "independent" swing-voters....
He may suggest otherwise, but it's become obvious to me that my friend (and fellow blogger) Anoka Flash is a Clinton-supporter (though, like me, he originally supported Governor Richardson until he ended his campaign this past January). Flash has suggested over the past several months that Senator Clinton is "more experienced" and "more electable" than Senator Obama. Yet this is what he wrote today on his blog-site (http://centrisity.blogspot.com) regarding the Democratic nominating process and the fact that Senator Obama is poised to win a majority of the delegates...and whether or not Senator Clinton should end her campaign after tomorrow's contests:
"We've been standing in line at this amusement park long enough, time to get on the roller coaster and see what this thing's got!"
Yes, we've fought this out for quite some time now, and it is indeed time to get onboard (by "roller-coaster," he means the Obama campaign). If a large percentage of Senator Clinton's supporters decide to support Senator Obama, he will be the president come January 20, 2009. If not, it may very well be Senator McCain who emerges victorious.
Given that the policy differences between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama pale in comparison with the policy differences between her and Senator McCain, I hope a large majority of Senator Clinton's supporters decide to step onboard the Obama ride, and not the McCain one with the (presently) shorter line of ticket-holders waiting their turn to board.
ENDORSEMENTS FROM QUALITY MUSICIANS OFTEN FAIL TO HELP WIN VOTES
It was probably a good move by the Clinton camp not to over-publicize the fact that exceptionally-annoying pop singer Ricky Martin endorsed her candidacy prior to the Puerto Rico primary (which she won 68% to 32% over Senator Obama on Sunday) by saying the following (in a somewhat rambling way):
"Whether fighting for better education, universal health care and social well-being, as first lady and senator from New York--representing millions of Latinos--she has always fought for what is most important for our families."
It's a good sentiment, and what Mr. Martin says is largely correct (her popularity among Hispanic voters is another reason why Senator Clinton needs to be utilized often on the campaign trail in the autumn). But Mr. Martin is the same individual who gave us the awful (and, for a while, ever-present) "Livin' la Vida Loca," as well as some other tunes which are possibly worse. So the Clinton camp (rightfully) thanked him for the endorsement, and then rather quickly moved on to other topics....
Meanwhile, ex-Senator John Edwards received the endorsement and campaign-trail singing of Jackson Browne (whose album "Late For The Sky" is still pitch-perfect and sociologically-brilliant, well over thirty years after it was released), and yet his campaign ended last January.
Not to be outdone, Senator Chris Dodd received the endorsement and campaign-trail singing of one of the greatest American singer/songwriters of all time: Paul Simon. People flocked to the "Dodd-for-President" events at which Mr. Simon sang; they loved the music, and they seemed to like what Senator Dodd had to say, but they decided that they'd rather hear similar policy ideas from Senator Obama and Senator Clinton.
That's alright. Mr. Edwards and Senator Dodd remain national figures who, of late, have and will continue to be on the campaign trail with Senator Obama as he switches into general election mode, and they will continue to influence national policy, as well (Senator Dodd will most likely do so in his capacity as a national legislator; Mr. Edwards as an activist and possible future cabinet appointee).
This means that, though Senator Dodd and Mr. Edwards got blown-away by the Obama and Clinton campaigns, they can take heart in the fact that, as Mr. Simon would say of them, "...the fighter still remains."
FUTURE FODDER FOR RIDICULE: HASSLINGTON'S MONTANA AND SOUTH DAKOTA PRIMARY PICKS
Montana: Senator Clinton is radioactive there (opinion polls have suggested that for months). PREDICTION: SENATOR OBAMA BY TWENTY-FOUR PERCENTAGE POINTS.
South Dakota: This will be much closer, but with rumors of Senator Clinton dropping-out of the race (I wish to stress that they are ONLY rumors as I type this), Senator Obama should pull it out, making the Wisconsin-to-Washington state corridor (which extends as far south as Missouri, Kansas, and Colorado) full and unbroken Obama territory. PREDICTION: SENATOR OBAMA BY SIX PERCENTAGE POINTS.
Psst: Watch Senator Obama make a run at places like Montana this coming autumn....
No comments:
Post a Comment