"Why of course all of my subjects love me, you fool, Fousesquawk"
As the battle for the Democratic nomination goes on between Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama, hard feelings continue to grow between the two. Unfortunately, in spite of their joint efforts to smooth over the racial tension in the last debate in Las Vegas, it is still there. If I had to make a prediction right now, I would guess that Clinton will have a big day on super Tuesday and go on to the nomination. (I hope I am wrong.) Until then, Hillary has to walk a fine line in trying to beat back Obama. We all know how the Clinton machine will play hardball to destroy their opponents. Hillary, however has to defeat Obama while not destroying black support in the general election. That is her dilemma.
There is no denying that some ugly elements crept into the Nevada caucus, especially when the Culinary Workers Union announced their support for Obama. (Witness the attempt by Clinton supporters to challenge additional precincts in casinos.) Bill, as is his custom, has acted like a jerk in his public comments. Now he has most recently claimed that he and Chelsea overheard (in their presence) an Obama union supporter proclaiming that if anyone voted for Obama, their job would be in jeopardy. Obama, for his part, is becoming increasingly vocal in his criticism of the ex-president's comments.
Specifically, Hillary's dilemma is that if the primary race continues to be nasty, and if racial overtones are present, then she risks not having Obama's active support as the nominee once she wins. She also runs the risks of many black voters choosing to stay home in November if they feel Obama was treated badly.
The obvious way to avert all this would be to offer Obama the VP slot as her running mate, especially if she feels the black vote has been damaged significantly. (Of course, the Democrats always assume that they own the black vote no matter what.) The question is-would Obama accept? If he does and Hillary wins, then as VP, he would be considered the heir apparent in 8 years. Of course, if he declines and continues as a senator, he would still probably be the obvious front-runner in 8 years. Same calculation in 4 years if Hillary is defeated.
It is also quite likely that this primary contest will continue to be a hard-fought battle that goes down to the wire, with the Clintons being forced to pull out all the stops in order to win-and that is what they have always done. At that point, Obama might just play the good Democrat, congratulate Mrs Clinton, give her the requisite endorsement-and then sit on his haunches. Many black voters, in spite of Bill's popularity in the African-American community, might decide that Mrs Clinton is just an ambitious phony (Gads!)and stay home on election day. That would be catastrophic for her chances.
Of course, Mrs Clinton is fighting hard for the black vote in the primary. Recent developments should give her concern. In Michigan (whose delegates have been taken away by the party anyway for moving their primary up), Mrs Clinton, virtually the only contender on the ballot, couldn't even carry 60% (55%). Obama was supported by black voters voting "uncommitted"- a large bloc (40%). The remaining 5% was "split" between Kucinich and Gravel. In addition, Hillary figures to lose South Carolina to Obama where about 50% of the Democrat vote is African-American.
So Hillary now has to walk that tightrope, always calculating how to beat Obama without alienating an important voting bloc in the general election. She especially has to be concerned over charges of "playing the race card". For example, is there a point when the Clinton campaign feels so in danger of losing that they would bring up the subject of Obama's radical, Afro-centric pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago-and his close ties to Louis Farrakhan? (I refer to Wright's close ties to Farrakhan-not Obama). If that issue comes up in the primary race, then Clinton will be perceived as having played "the race card".
It is unfortunate that there is a racial aspect to this election. I really believe that America is ready for a black, Hispanic, Asian or female president. I also think Obama can win with significant white vote. But I'll let Hillary worry about that for now.
2 comments:
Hum so I see you do not have such warm and fuzzy feelings for Hillary. But then again after reading your other blog's are we better off with a Presidential Candidate that is being pimped out by no other than Oprah? I read your Dr. Phil blog, let's not forget who gave him a hearty endorsement and his own show. As a middle class mother in a predominant Republican Orange County I ask when it comes time to vote this question, which candidate is less likely to screw me the little person over? So who are you endorsing? Reading your post makes me wonder what political party are you registered to? I feel you may be a democrat but I could be wrong. Too bad the other Democratic Candidate's are not getting as much media attention because with all the child like squabbling between Hillary and Obama I am dizzily reminded of the election's for student council in Jr. High School. Maybe we are better off without either of them. But then again those are the only 2 who have a chance. And sorry Sir I am a Clinton fan. I could care less about Monica. I remember how much better the economy was when Bill was holding the reins. I also remember that Both George's have sent us to war and the economy went down the pooper. Hillary has experience on her side as the First Lady, a Senator and a Lawyer. What we need right now is a leader who is going to deal with the economy and the housing crisis. We need someone who can get us out of this war intact, who can deal with the rising costs of everything from gas to health care. I am not expecting a miracle worker. But do you really think Obama has what it takes to tackle all of these issue's? Does Hillary? I am not psychic so I can't say with certainty but my vote goes to Hillary. The fact Oprah the Republican is backing Obama scares me. Don't forgot who thrust Dr. Phil upon the masses. No other than Lady O herself.
Well, you are definitely wrong if you think I am a Democrat. (Actually I am the only one in my family who wasn't a Democrat.) I am an independent (small case "i"). Because my views are conservative, I have always voted Republican, but staying independent leaves me free to criticize the Republicans all I want. And believe me, the party has made plenty of bad moves in recent years. The reason they lost big in 2006 was because they forgot their principles. But I digress.
I am not a supporter of Barack Obama. I think he is an empty suit-an eloquent charismatic speaker who says nothing and has no real ideas. Yet, I find myself pulling for him to win the primary simply because I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton.
I won't try to debate Bill Clinton's presidency with you nor your opinion of George Bush. Let me just say that I don't care about Monica Lewinsky either-except that Bill committed perjury to cover it up. As a retired law enforcement officer who has testified hundreds of times in courtrooms-and never lied-I consider perjury a dagger into the heart of our entire criminal court system, if I may be a little melodramic. The fact of the matter is that Bill Clinton was a corrupt president, and there are few things worse than official corruption. Sex was the least of the problems.
Nor will I try to debate you on Hillary's "experience". You think she has it and I don't. What matters to me, aside from the fact that I don't agree with her liberal ideas, is that I consider her to be a full partner in her husband's corruption.
Last point. We disagree on which issues are the real crises in our country. To me the 2 biggest issues are Islamic terror and illegal immigration. If we don't prevail in the first, all those other issues will not matter.
However, I thank you for your imput.
Post a Comment