I wrote this for today's Beyond Chron:
"We can't be a new story. There's nothing we can do. I can't make her taller, younger, male. There's a lot of things I can't do." - Bill Clinton yesterday.
Today, Hillary Clinton will lose New Hampshire to Barack Obama - and it will be a wider margin than most polls suggest. The question now is whether the nomination is already over and, if so, how soon will Clinton drop out. I believe it is over, but the Clintons will probably take a while to acknowledge it. While there are many ways that Obama could have overtaken her, progressives should be pleased that: (1) Obama's rise has not been at the expense of John Edwards, and (2) Bill Clinton has become her biggest liability. The Clintons won't give up yet, but they'll keep digging themselves into a hole - while consultants like Mark Penn continue to lose credibility.
Bill Clinton's comment to a group of supporters was not just ridiculous because he said that Hillary can't change her gender. After all, Elizabeth Edwards said months ago that her husband can't help it if he's a white male. What Clinton said here is that he can't make her taller, younger or male - as if only the popular ex-President can save her campaign now. For Bubba, it's all about ego and legacy - and his arrogance is now hurting her campaign. Nobody predicted he would become a liability - but for a Democrat who betrayed the Left, he's had it coming a long time.
For months, Hillary Clinton has tried to run on change - even going so far as to say that she "embodies change" because she would be the first woman President. But Bill's comment showed that her election is really about a dynasty - and unfortunately, it takes a family to break the glass ceiling. As Kerry Howley wrote last week in the New York Times, women throughout history who've been political "firsts" have gotten that way because of family connections. "The road to female advancement," she said, "often begins at the altar." Another President Clinton would be no exception.
Progressives should be especially hopeful about how the race has shaped up because Barack Obama's rise has not come at the expense of John Edwards. While he continues to finish third in most polls, and his chances of winning are slim to none, Edwards' numbers have not fallen since the Iowa caucus. What this means is that Obama has picked up support from undecideds and Clinton supporters - while Edwards maintains solid support despite the conventional wisdom that his campaign is over.
Some Obama partisans have argued that Edwards is a "spoiler" because both candidates have a progressive message of change - and that his presence only risks us getting stuck with Clinton. It's a logical point, but right now it doesn't look like Edwards needs to drop out. Edwards is the most progressive candidate - and as long as he does not doom Obama's chances is a valuable voice in the race to hold Obama accountable. Edwards is not letting Clinton use him to split the anti-Hillary vote, which is her obvious intent: in the last debate, he rose to Obama's defense.
Clinton consultant Mark Penn lost enormous credibility with the press - after sending out an e-mail on Saturday night called "where is the bounce?" that claimed Obama did not gain traction from his Iowa victory. Two polls came out on Friday showing the race tied in New Hampshire - but they were partially conducted before the Iowa caucus results were known. More polls have come out since with Obama leading by 10-12 points, proving that Penn's e-mail was desperate spin at best.
But Penn has already been exposed as a liar. When the Des Moines Register's final poll predicted a 7-point Obama victory in Iowa, Penn said it was "out of sync with the other polling done in the race." On the night after the Iowa results, he admitted to knowing the trend had been shifting towards Obama. "At the very moment Penn was accusing the Des Moines Register of producing unreliable data, and saying it was Clinton who had the momentum," said ABC News, "he knew otherwise."
Will Clinton try a comeback? If she does, it won't be successful. While we should never trust anything that Dick Morris says, Bill Clinton's former consultant predicted that it would be a "very dirty comeback." Clinton will say that Obama is unelectable to beat Republicans and doesn't have experience, said Morris, but what she'll mean - without saying it outright - is that America will not vote for a black man. I believe that would backfire.
I hate Dick Morris. He doesn't believe in anything, has worked for Republicans like Trent Lott and Jesse Helms - and advised Bill Clinton in 1996 to get re-elected with Welfare Repeal, the Defense of Marriage Act, school uniforms and the V-chip. Now he has a career on Fox News bashing the Clintons. But the guy knows how to do race-baiting negative politics - he claims the infamous Jesse Helms ad in 1990 showing a pair of white hands holding a rejection letter was his idea.
Hopefully, the Clintons are better than that, know that the race is over, and will drop out with a shred of dignity after tonight's result. But I think they have too much selfish pride, and have spent too many years building up their dynasty to let a freshman Senator usurp the nomination. Bill's speech yesterday morning certainly made me feel that way. But after Hillary almost broke down crying yesterday afternoon, I started to wonder if they will understand that leaving now is the right thing to do.
Either way, it's obvious. The Clintons are history.
Send feedback to paul@beyondchron.org
|
|
|
Permalink :: 8 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
