Maybe. This is consistent with a Mike Huckabee-type race.
Will the dream die?
[Funny thing: I read Bob Shrum's book last weekend... (Admirable guy, even if he stands foursquare against most of what I stand for.)]
But no, she’s got to get out.
Right?
Update: I laughed at this:
One is perfectly capable of acknowledging that the identity of the nominee is no longer in dispute and still find that, aside from morbid speculation and existential unknowability, there are reasons for her to postpone any plans for a concession. Some of these reasons may be unpalatable for Democrats and for Obama, but they are not entirely irrational. …
3. Embarrassment. If she drops out tomorrow and winds up winning in West Virginia and Kentucky, Obama will be mightily embarrassed. Having her in the race gives him an excuse for losing those two states. (I ran this by an Obama adviser who said, “We’ll take our chances.”)
Ha ha.
12 responses so far ↓
Diz // May 7, 2008 at 11:34 pm
What’s your take on why the SDs haven’t really moved up to now. I’d imagine that they make the difference as to whether Hil stays or goes, but if they don’t go soon (and even before IN and NC) you have to wonder what is taking them so long at this point. Do they like the wining and dining or is Obama too risky?
Giselle // May 8, 2008 at 4:41 am
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/05/08/deal/index.html
Check out this link. Kind of interesting. I personally like the idea of her being named Senate Majority Leader or nominated to SCOTUS because I don’t think the ‘best case scenario’ Obama-Clinton dream ticket will happen. McCain will win in November.
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 7:27 am
What are you smoking, Giselle? Oh…wait…
You are in Netherlands.
(Brrrroom chick!)
McCain will win if these white women are indeed racist enough to prefer an avowed foe of women’s choice over a black man. It’s about the time that they show their true color.
Like you, however, I don’t count on them being so enlightened about their choices. After all, the whole sisterhood thing was just a cover for deep-seeded racism.
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 7:35 am
And I must admit that Hillary is exploiting that base sentiment brilliantly. Read her new dig at Obama. Apparently, the only hard-working people in America are white.
Shameless.
Ben // May 8, 2008 at 7:37 am
Diz –
Why haven’t they moved? Because they’re a bunch of chickens who don’t want to make any decision whatsoever. They could have ended this in February, had they so desired, and their nominee would be much stronger for it.
Also, however, I think that many are aware of Senator Obama’s weaknesses as a general election candidate. He’s the most liberal Democrat nominated since 1972, in all likelihood, and even in a year that will be very good to the Democratic party, that might be tough to push. He has resurrected the McGovern coalition — something the superdelegates were created to stop. The candidates of that wing of the party tend to lose big.
On the other hand, if you’re a left-winger, you’ve got to try. This is the year to try to push the goalposts way left. And the country has changed since 1972, 1984, and 1988.
Giselle –
What does Hillary want? I don’t know that Obama has anything to offer her that she can’t get on her own. Senate Majority Leader isn’t his to offer (and she’s still a relatively new kid on the block there), the Supreme Court, while interesting, hasn’t had a real political figure named since Earl Warren, and no diplomatic post can compare with her time as First Lady.
***
My guess about what she really wants? If Senator Obama goes down to a Dukakis-style defeat in 2008, she wants the nomination in 2012. (If he wins in the fall, it’s game over for her — no open nomination till 2016, and she’ll be 68 by then. Well, maybe she’ll still be in the game, like McCain this year, but it seems to me that there’ll be fresher Democratic faces by then.)
But if the Obama supporters blame her for it, that might not be in the cards.
Ben // May 8, 2008 at 7:44 am
Let’s get this all totalled up.
The working class? Bunch of racists.
The white feminists? Racists.
Economic conservatives? Racist in the effects of their policies.
Americans are just a whole bunch of racists.
Why on earth would Obama want to lead a people like that, then?
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 7:50 am
Why do people discount the possibility of another Obama-Clinton feud should the former lose the election this year? Yes, Americans are far less forgiving to losers than other people around the world, but Obama’s very young and carries an exceptionally well-organized grass roots movement with him. Even if he loses, he will lose by a tiny margin, so he won’t be another Dukakis or Kerry.
She and her supporters are deluding themselves, I think.
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 7:55 am
Ben. I am not Obama. Haha. He probably thinks differently.
But to counter your point, do you honestly believe that race card isn’t being played by the Clintons? You can argue that the same dynamic is at work amongst black voters, but they were Bill’s greatest supporters during the 1990’s and remained so until very recently, even with Obama in the race.
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 7:58 am
Ok. Perhaps I should tone it down. Shameless identity politics. How about that.
MichaelB // May 8, 2008 at 9:49 am
The “shameless identity politics” card being played by Obama is a big reason why so many Clinton supporters are cool on Obama. Yes, I said being played by Obama.
There are plenty of good reasons for Democrats to prefer Clinton. Even if you disagree, calling anyone who does buy into those reasons presumptively a racist is… not conducive to party unity.
As a McCain supporter, I urge continued deployment of this argument!
Josh // May 8, 2008 at 10:21 am
I’m kinda indifferent to Obama, but it eludes me why anyone would prefer Clinton. Between her “tough” pandering past support of the Iraq War and her attempt to paint eight years as first lady as direct experience (like running from bullets in Bosnia?), I find very little that’s appealing about her as any kind of public official. So, by default, I prefer Obama, who manages to make empty platitudes sound more compelling than they should.
That being said, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to prefer either candidate over the other that have absolutely nothing to do with racism (a motivation which cannot and should not be ascribed without direct evidence). If we ask the question, “Who would Lisa Simpson vote for?” I’m not really sure what the answer is - Obama possibly fits her values better, but she’d be very tempted to vote for a female president too. After all, Lisa is the perfect archetype of a liberal feminist.
Homin Lee // May 8, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Being black doesn’t necessarily mean playing “identity politics” card. Openly inserting the phrase “white working class” into stump speeches as if they somehow represent the saintliest of Americans, on the other hand, comes dangerously close to that. At least that’s my view.
Obama does have the tendency to go lightly on thorny racial issues (affirmative action, black crime, violent rap songs, etc) to pander to his black constituency. What can I say. He is a conventional politician, like Clinton. But he is fundamentally constrained by the fact that blacks make up a small portion of the electorate.
Leave a Comment