I've been telling my friends for months now that HOW this primary ends is far more important than WHEN it ends. It's going to end soon, the question is, how?
I keep recalling our situation in Missouri four years ago. We had a sitting (but unpopular) democratic governor in Bob Holden. Our state auditor decided to mount a primary challenge, against the wishes of the party establishment, and many democrats. The challenger? Claire McCaskill.
I remember I vowed I would never support Claire in the general if she beat Holden in the primary. I also vowed never to support her again. Well, Claire beat Bob in the primary, and the most extraordinary thing happened. Holden made an eloquent concession speech and called, passionately and genuinely, for party unity. Holden called his most ardent supporters and begged them to support Claire.
It was stunning, and it totally disarmed my ill-will toward Claire. McCaskill lost to Matt Blunt in the general, but, in large part because of Holden, Claire was not seen as a divisive figure, and survived politically to challenge Talent for her Senate seat. Holden was one of many important factors in the Democrats getting control of the Senate in 2006.
Our race is far more emotional, with hopes by both sides that glass ceilings and racial inequalities will be abated by one candidate's success. But I still believe unity can be had.
At this point, unity is the only thing that can save Obama for the 2008 election. If Obama loses, unity is the only thing that can save Hillary's chances in 2012.
The question remains, how will it end?
|
|
|
Permalink :: 65 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.