31. May 2008 by admin.

Today, the Democratic rules committee meets to decide what to do about Florida and Michigan, which were disqualified by the party because they held their primary elections too early.  In 2004, John Kerry was the clear winner after only a few weeks of campaigning, and many people across the country felt disenfranchised because they were voting only after the winner had been determined.So this year, many states fell over themselves trying to hold early primaries. New York moved its primary to early March, and Florida and Michigan moved theirs to January, in violation of Party rules. The decision had been made in 2007, and the consequences of that decision were clear: their delegates would be barred from the convention.

In response, the candidates refrained from campaigning in the two states, and Obama took his name off the Michigan ballot. Clinton won both states, through name recognition and the fact that she had yet to endure the slings and arrows of the campaign season.

And now that Clinton is behind, she’s yelling ‘disenfranchisement’ and demanding that the delegates from these states be seated with their full voting rights. (This is why, despite the fact that I voted for Clinton in March, I’m against her now: she has no integrity.) The voters of Florida and Michigan were disenfranchised by their state Party leaders, who thought they could break the rules and then get absolution through moaning and wailing.

As far as the rules committee’s decision, sadly, I don’t think it really matters. It won’t matter how the issue of Florida and Michigan are resolved, and it won’t matter who wins the Democratic Party’s nomination for President: the party will lose anyway. Maybe their candidate will be elected, but I doubt it.

The two candidates are perceived as members of a ‘disadvantaged’ groups: Hillary Clinton is a woman, and Barack Obama is black. If you favor Clinton over Obama, you’re a racist, and if you favor Obama over Clinton, you’re a sexist. Whoever wins will alienate the other half of the party’s base, and no party can expect to win that way without broad appeal beyond the base, which neither candidate has.

On the metrics, it’s hard to assess who would be the better candidate. Obama got more votes in primaries and caucuses, but in polls matching them against John McCain, the Republican candidate, Clinton does a few points better.

It’s been suggested that Clinton and Obama could both be on the ticket if the winner picked the loser to be the Vice President. Alas, I don’t think that will work either. Clinton as Vice President will be the Democrats’ Dick Cheney: the dark force that is the real power. Obama-Clinton mirrors Bush-Cheney too strongly. And if Clinton, through some degree of political legerdemain, became the Presidential candidate, many people would believe that she stole the nomination from Obama. In either case, the ticket would get lukewarm support, at best, across the Democratic spectrum, and that will not suffice to win.

Posted in Presidential election, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton | No Comments »

14. May 2008 by admin.

Hillary Clinton won yesterday’s West Virginia primary election. That, plus a $2 MetroCard, will get her a ride on the subway….

Years ago, the resident wit where I used to work told this joke:

Bill and Hillary Clinton were riding through Arkansas in the Presidential limousine when they saw an old childhood friend, who worked as a gas station attendant. Bill asked to stop the car, and they talked briefly with their old friend.

After they were on the road again, Bill asked Hillary, “Aren’t you glad you married me instead of him?”

And Hillary replied, “How do you think you became President?”

We always knew that Hillary was, to a non-trivial degree, the power behind the throne of the Clinton administration. And when she started her run for President, her nomination seemed inevitable, even though a sizable part of the population hated her guts.

I voted for Clinton in the New York primary in March: I thought Barack Obama, her Democratic opponent, was a really good orator, but Clinton had the benefit of experience, and would be better able to hit the ground running.

But then the Democratic campaign devolved into a series of hissy fits, and Clinton was the lead hisser. In a spectacular blunder, she spun the tale of her arrival under sniper fire in Bosnia. And now it seems that she stands for nothing, except for getting herself elected.

If I could take back my vote from March, I’d vote for Obama today.

Still—in spite of all this—she won West Virginia. Is it that Obama, who will almost certainly become the Democratic nominee, is saving his resources for the general election? Or is there something else going on?

Posted in Hillary Clinton | No Comments »