After PA, My Thoughts Going Forward
After the ABC debate debacle last week, I've really soured on MSM, TV in general, and especially cable news. I like Keith Olberman a lot and Chris Matthews is a ridiculous joy, but by watching this nonsense I'm part of the problem. The totally nonsubstantive obsession with parsing every single word a candidate says and hoping it somehow becomes a controversy is utterly depressing, and that goes for whichever candidate it happens to. So I almost entirely avoided TV coverage last night and checked TPM periodically for margin updates. This was liberating. I was able to find out the results and form a dispassionate objective opinion about where the race is going. It feels really good not to have spin and talking head poison in your veins.
So here are my thoughts about the race going forward.
Obama should stop taking the bait in engaging the Clinton campaign in negative tit for tat. That's playing the game by their rules and the advantage is in their favor. His campaign should issue a statement saying something to the effect of "This nomination process has been an amazing experience and we look forward to securing the nomination and the rest of the contests with a positive focus on issues and defeating John McCain in November." The campaign should then almost completely ignore the Clinton campaign and only talk about real plans for fixing the economy and taking on McCain. The daily conference call circus should stop. If reporters push Axelrod or Plouffe on negative charges from the Clinton camp, they should say "They said that? Wow. That's depressing.. Eesh.. To be honest I don't even feel like responding to that anymore. We want the rest of this process to be positive and to end it on a high note. Let's talk about the environment and lowering gas prices, eh?"
Obama supporters should really honestly dedicate part of their energy to mending fences and being nice to Hillary supporters. They're really angry and hurt. It sucks to be losing, and it sucks more when some cocky asshole on the other team is rubbing it in their face. Cut it out. This will resolve itself eventually, and when it does you're going to want all of these people to start pumping time, money, and enthusiasm Obama's way.
I have almost no doubt now that Obama will seal up the nomination in due time. My feeling that this is ending doesn't really have to do with the math in Obama's favor either. Delegate math and popular vote don't matter if the cable news assholes decide that pushing a different narrative will drag this thing out to Denver. Another reason we shouldn't listen to them anymore, no matter who you support.
Why do I think this is winding down?
First, money. Hillary will definitely enjoy a bump in polls and a very large cash infusion after her win in PA. I have trouble seeing where more money is coming from though. Her raising is going down and her debts are going up. Even if her fundraising totals still sound decent, each month less and less can be allocated for the primary. I suppose if she wanted she could easily drop 20 mill of her own money to go through June, but Obama will still out raise her and outspend her. Some super delegates might only care about that. Some party members value politicians on pure dollars and cents. Hillary has done well for herself, but Obama has proven to be the best fund raiser in political history.
Second, hawks. Hillary Clinton came out as a full blown hawk when she made comments about "obliterating" Iran. It was somewhat buried yesterday, but I think Hillary's comments about Iran will become a big issue in the coming days. I know I started this post saying I'm fed up with parsing candidates' words, but this is not even close to an exaggerated memory or a slip about bitter gun owners. This was a real foreign policy position. If I had read that quote without being told who said it, I would have guessed that it came from either George W. Bush or John McCain. I'm dead serious. As a democrat, the last thing I want in a candidate is sabre rattling and talk of more war. It is also completely distasteful for a candidate to talk about hypothetical use of nuclear weapons and obliterating a specific country. Whenever nuclear force comes up, the standard answer should be "I don't want to get engaged in hypotheticals, but understand that the security of Americans is my first priority, and obviously we will do whatever is necessary to defend ourselves and our allies."
Let's look at Sen. Clinton's record on this. The cynical view of why she voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq instead of lining up with the 21 senators who didn't, is that she wanted to appear more hawkish and willing to get tough with our enemies. Then she supported Bush by voting to declare part of Iran's army a terrorist organization. Now she says that we will obliterate Iran if they attack Israel. There's a pattern here. Maybe retaliation for an attack against our Ally Israel would be the response for whoever the president is, but what kind of maniac talks like that on the campaign trail? Congratulations, you just gave angry Islamic militants another reason to be angry and militant. John McCain wants 100 years in Iraq and sings "Bomb, Bomb, Iran." Democrats don't want talk of more war, we want talk of peace.
