Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Civil War Without End
Dana Milbank in the Washington Post used it first, perhaps, but I felt the Groundhog Day vibes this morning. It looks like the Democratic Party will bleed itself to death before November.
Obama came from behind, caught up, and stalled there. True, he is slightly ahead in delegates, but a bare win in Denver will feel troubled, polluted by a sour taste left over from bitter campaigning and dodging the cheap shots. It is hard to see how Hillary Clinton would find reason to concede before then, and the closer the two are while primaries remain the harder they will fight.
I can't fault either for trying; both have sound foundations for their support. It may be a perfect storm of two camps finding the exact location of a divide, allowing a permanent war across the exact center of Democratic demographics.
I have to admit it may be a relief if Obama flames out and Clinton goes on to win in Denver, since the current process is exhausting to all of us. But the likely route is more slugging, more quibbling, more fights over a super or two, more dueling endorsements, more analysis of expected delegate totals, and more resentment that may suck the life out of the fall campaign.
The asymmetry in reciprocal support shown by the two camps is troubling, although that there is any chance of a disappointed primary voter jumping ship to McAttack makes me really angry. How childish can people be? How unrealistic is the view that the opposition can be better than the ally?
We may get what we deserve, but the world does not deserve more GOP policies.
Comments (9)
Why do you say that Obama (the winner in terms of delegate count, states won, and popular vote) should "flame out?"
Maybe someone will pour a glass of water on Hillary and she will go down screaming, "I'm melting! I'm melting!"
April 23, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
You may remember I'm an Obama supporter. Note the construction---"...it may be relief...".
I mentioned an Obama collapse only becuase I can't see Clinton giving up no matter what happens, while Obama would acknowledge reality if it bit him. Still, I don't see him failing, but making it to Denver with more delegates than Clinton. Unfortunately, I don't see her settling for that.
April 23, 2008 9:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know you're an Obama supporter. I just object to the way these primaries are discussed. If Obama wins, well...he was expected to, so no big deal. If he cuts Clinton's expected win by 20 points in PA, well...why can't he just "close the deal?" When you talk about someone "flaming out" you only mention Obama. After a while that stuff gets into the fiber of peoples' thoughts and becomes a perceived truth.
One would think that Obama was actually losing, rather than winning, based on the reporting that is going on yesterday and today. What? No calls for him to drop out? I'm sure Hill will suggest that soon.
I agree that Hillary will not go quietly into the night, but she is more likely to "flame out" than he is, because she is so volatile and has such poor judgement. Frankly, I'm amazed that her recent threat to "OBLITERATE Iran" hasn't caused her to go up in flames. I guess it is because we are so used to swaggering rhetoric that it doesn't even raise an eyebrow with many people. Maybe we'll have to wait for her to come out in a flight-suit (complete with cod-piece) -- never mind. I don't want to give her any ideas.
April 23, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama came from behind, caught up, and stalled there. True, he is slightly ahead in delegates.."
I think the more truthier statement is that he came from behind and passed Clinton in every possible measure, most importantly, the one used to win the nomination--delegates.
His lead in delegates is absolutely insurmountable at this point. "Slightly ahead in delegates" may have been true back in February.
I respect your support for Hillary and I do recognize a divide.
I also recognize that it is the Clinton's goal not to win the primary, but to make Barack Obama unelectable in the eyes of the superdelegates.
If that's the Clintons' goal, it will be viewed by the MSM the same way, as it already has been before the "we have to make him unelectable" diatribe began.
Both candidates said they would support the other should he/she get the nomination.
It's easy to push whatever survey you want, who would support whom, who wouldn't, etc.
But let's not do it in a vacuum.
Part of the discussion should be that when asked if Hillary was trustworthy, a survey showed only 38% said yes.
April 23, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is only her goal because she is not winning the primary; something she has no control over. She THOUGHT she was the inevitable winner; that is why she mismanaged her money so badly in the beginning. She thought it would be over and she would have money left over. She still believes she is the inevitable winner; she cannot believe that she could lose, and will do anything ANYTHING to make it happen. That is what narcissists do. To hell with everyone else (including primary voters, evidently)
April 23, 2008 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree with your post. Party leaders better be prepared to offer some kind of explanation for the mess of this Nomination process. Dean lost control early and never got it back. At some point you have a have party discipline to get things done without the "kids" beating each other up. This wasn't done in any fashion. Its embarrassing from where I sit and it hasn't served either candidate well. How many millions spent that you will have a hard time generating in the fall on fighting within your party. That Dean should resign as soon as the convention is over is a given.
April 23, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some of the Obama people at TPM can't quite grasp that the reason Clinton doesn't go away is that she has a solid base of support in the Democratic Party. I used to be one of them. I've switched to Obama because I think Clinton in the end won't find enough to put her over. It's unfortunate that she has just enough support that she can still hope for a lucky break without looking like a fool.
And I so wanted to have our civil war with the GOP.
Still, I'm not so sure this epic battle is going to count for much in November. Given the likely state of our economy by then, I don't see how McCain can come up with a winning strategy. The race card and the gender/hate Hilary cards are pretty powerful, but sheer economic terror always is the joker in the deck.
April 23, 2008 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary clearly does have a solid support base. Its just that it isn't large enough to overtake Obama. I think the Clintons do well understand this and therefore must destroy the perceived electability of Obama. This is undoubtedly their plan. Obama's team needs to privately keep pointing out Hillary's electability problems to the supers. Its not a case of his baggage versus that of some idealized candidate, but rather his baggage versus hers.
April 23, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Josh makes a point on the front page that McCain is situated as comfortably as possible right now, no bad stories on him and lots of bad press for Dems, and still he's only tied. THat's cause for optimism.
I just found myself feeling Groundhog Day, Dana Milbank echoed it. Just a low point for me. I'll get over it, I hope.
April 23, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment