Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

What the Democratic Candidates (And Party Leaders) Should Do

As it is, neither Sen. Hillary Clinton nor Sen. Barack Obama can garner 2,025 delegate votes for the Democratic Presidential Nomination solely through accumulation of pledged delegates.  That ended when Clinton reached 1,228 pledged delegates.  So Superdelegates must decide this contest.

Knowing that, Clinton strategies seem to cycle through at about two per week, as to how to win over enough Superdelegates to get the nomination.  Right now, the only realistic path for her is to wait to see if Obama somehow self-destructs.  Or try to make it happen.

Obama's skill at redirecting the debate when in crisis has been shown to be considerable, most notably in crafting A More Perfect Union, on March 18.  Not only did this speech show Obama to be tough enough to confront his accusers (FOX Noise and the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy), but has served in some small measure to have marginalized the attackers, revealing just a little bit the hypocritical neofascist partisans for what they truly are.  He has posted the sign, "Attack at Your Own Risk."

Given this, it is risky policy for the Clinton campaign or the candidate herself to attack Obama on what really are peripheral issues.  I will also show that it is entirely unnecessary.

Given that Clinton has passed the 1,228 threshold, unanimous support of the Superdelegates will give her the nomination, should she receive it.  We have already established the prerequisites for this possibility.  But given that if Sen. Obama found a way to lose support for the nomination, Sen. Clinton has established herself as the best remaining option, far and away.  So she need do nothing to secure the nomination in this circumstrance, and indeed doing nothing appears to be her best option from this point forward (as shown previously that Sen. Obama can damage attackers).  This is not to say that she should quit, but that she should campaign in a manner that will best preserve her dwindling chance while simultaneously maximizing the competitiveness for Democrats in the fall; indeed, continuing will serve to keep adding Democratic registrants, voters, volunteers, and organizers for November.

Sen. Obama needs to do something as well.  He needs to ignore any future attacks by the Clinton campaign, and simply assume the role of presumptive nominee.  He cannot lose ground to Sen. Clinton in the remaining contests to the degree that the nomination is in serious jeopardy, barring the complete collapse scenario (CCS).  His campaign can make significant progress for the general election by running as the Democratic nominee, opposed not by Sen. Hillary Clinton, but by Sen. John McCain.

The Superdelegates also have a charge to complete.  Superdelegates remaining undeclared must, if not genuinely undecided, declare support for their chosen candidate.  This fairly establishes the finish line for both Clinton and Obama, and helps either candidate to determine the best strategy for winning in Novamber, whether that be battling McCain, standing aside, or any other course of action.

These actions will serve the individual Presidential nomination candidates most effectively, while simultaneously best serving the Democratic party in winning White House control and Congressional gains in 2008.


Comments (5)

Christopher, I would agree but for the fact I think you're too optimistic. Hilary's attacks on Obama were showing results in polls and election returns, forcing him to defend himself. Yes, his speech helped him recover *partially* from the first instance of the Wright problem. But her strategy remains to damage him so severely that the party will have to turn to her. She has raised the Wright controversy repeatedly, even on Fox and with Scaife.

I *DO NOT* think anybody in the Obama campaign or any prominent Obama supporters or superdelegates should *publicly* call on her to withdraw. That's because many of Hilary's supporters will feel she wasn't given a fair shot. On the other hand, if she continues to attack, Obama will have to defend himself because her highly professional operation has shown the capacity to destroy his candidacy.

My take on the polls about supporters of either candidate defecting to McCain or staying home are that many of them really will. Hilary's campaign tactics are quite effectively driving both groups. Many Obama supporters find Hilary's tactics truly repugnant. When she called it "the fun part" it doubly offended Obama supporters. Hilary's supporters seem to take her at her word that she won Florida and Michigan fair and square and is being cheated out of the nomination. She has weaved a narrative convincing many of her supporters that she and they have been swindled by a devious junior senator from Illinois who somehow seized control of the Democratic National Committee way back when everybody thought Hilary had the nomination sewed up. Somehow Obama connived to hold caucuses where there should have been primaries, and deceived delegates into thinking they had obligations to support the candidates they pledged to support, and twisted the arms of superdelegates into believing results outside the states she won had some phantom legitimacy. Hilary didn't lose; Obama didn't win--he stole the election.

So there we are. Hilary's tactics have turned many Obama supporters against her and many of her supporters against Obama. Among other aspersions, her campaign has accused him of "Ken Starr" methods, reviving a badge of victimhood based on a genuine historic record of persecution well known to all Democrats, especially her supporters.

If Obama doesn't fight back, he loses and a lot of his supporters *will* desert a party Hilary controls. If Obama does fight back and wins, many of her supporters will boycott Obama because they think he stole the nomination. This could happen precisely because of the depth of hostility Hilary's campaign artfully aroused among supporters of *both* candidates.

The only way to avoid calamity is for Hilary, on her own, to acknowledge there was no stab in the back, that the people have spoken through legitimate electoral processes. If people push her to withdraw and she grudgingly does so, she'll set up Obama for a fall.

It's ironic that only Hilary can rescue the party from this situation. That's consistent with her campaign's claims. What they don't mention is their role in creating the situation and the especially ironic twist that she can only rescue the party by ending her own candidacy--conceding the nomination, calming her loyal followers, and giving Obama her full support after his fair victory. It won't unmake the wounds inflicted, but it might stop the bleeding and allow Democrats to start thinking about their candidate vs. McCain.

Didn't John Kerry "ignore" the Swift Boat attacks? If your strength is your successful self-defense tactics, why piss that away by doing nothing? This post is somewhat contradictory...

I probably should be more clear.

Obama should not "pretend" Clinton doesn't exist, or ignore comments completely, but when underhanded claims come from the Clinton campaign, he should respond by pointing out that these are just desperation tactics, and that he will be the Democrat to defeat John McCain in the fall. The sooner he acts like the presumptive nominee, the sooner the Clinton campaign is forced to act like the Democratic equivalent to Huckabee.

And I would also not (yet) compare anything from the Clinton camp to the Swiftboating. Some may be as egregiously false and misleading, but it is not funded for millions in TV buys by unknown parties. It doesn't get the uncritical repetition of advertising, as it gets funneled through news media (at least theoretically), via press release or statement, and (theoretically) are subject to scrutiny regarding truth. The Swiftboat ads were essentially millions of dollars worth of anonymous televised lies.

This Diary at Daily Kos says it better than I did, in this post. And of course Rahcel Maddow.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/28/23053/8536/660/486485

"Sen. Obama needs to do something as well. He needs to ignore any future attacks by the Clinton campaign, and simply assume the role of presumptive nominee. He cannot lose ground to Sen. Clinton in the remaining contests to the degree that the nomination is in serious jeopardy, barring the complete collapse scenario (CCS). His campaign can make significant progress for the general election by running as the Democratic nominee, opposed not by Sen. Hillary Clinton, but by Sen. John McCain."

Cut the part about "ignoring future attacks" and you're getting close. Obama IS the "presumptive nominee," if you look at the numbers. He starts pulling more into the coalition every time he attacks McCain and tells people HE, not Hillary, is ready to lead.

Post a Comment

Cafe Features



Cafe Features


June 30-July 4

Steven Greenhouse The Big Squeeze

July 7-11

David Sirota The Uprising

July 14-18

Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam Grand New Party

July 21-25

Bill Bishop The Big Sort

August 4-9

Book Cover

August 11-15

James Galbraith The Predator State

August 25-29

Book Cover







Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Al Shaw



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address