As a registered and voting member of the Democratic Party, I am screaming to the high-ranking members of the Democratic Party: we have a problem, and y'all need to address it!
Listen up, Party Leaders: last night, the news media was awash with the story of Geraldine Ferraro’s unfortunate and indiscriminate words regarding Barack Obama. The media was also quick to point out that this type of behavior has been a pattern in Senator Clinton’s campaign. This is not to say that Senator Obama’s campaign has been without its moments of false steps and mistakes, it has. However, there is an insidious thread of attempting to discredit Senator Obama throughout Senator Clinton’s campaign that started as a whisper, but has become a patently obvious and apparent roar at this juncture. It is clear that we have a Democratic candidate who is battling another Democrat in a manner that breaks the Party line and serves to better neither candidate, except for perhaps, John McCain. I believe this is called "scorched earth" campaigning.
Last night, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann delivered one of his "Special Comments" at the end of his program. In the past, these comments have been directed exclusively at the Republican Party – George Bush and his administration, in particular. Olbermann’s comments are brutal, honest, blunt and scathing. He has received a lot of press and taken a lot of flak for them, and to be sure has gotten a big ratings boost for them, as well. But the bottom line is, they are effective. Last night, as I’m sure you know, he directed one at the Clinton campaign. A Democrat. The highlight of his 10-minute rant, was that Hillary Clinton is campaigning as if she were the Republican, and Barack Obama were the Democrat. And there are millions of voters across this country that agree.
We are facing the ripest moment in history to take power in this country. We have had the worst administration and President in modern history (perhaps of all time) in office for nearly 8 years. His approval rating is so low it’s embarrassing, even to the Republicans, who we all know, don’t embarrass easily. Critics and pundits have joked that the Democratic Party could run just about any candidate with a pulse against the Republicans and hope to win this year. And yet, in this year of bounty, we are facing a possible catastrophe – a loss to John McCain. Miraculously, the people chose the one man the Republican Party likely least wanted to run, but the candidate whose appeal to Independents makes him the one man in the Republican Party who might actually be able to WIN this November. And what is happening in our Party?
We have two candidates. Both of them appeal to large sections of the country. One is tied to a previous administration that is viewed through the scope of history favorably, but with a lot of negative baggage, nonetheless. We have another candidate, a relative unknown, with a uniquely American story, an amazing oratorical gift, and an ability to sway the masses. Oh, and he also happens to be the first legitimate hope for an African American President. Which is huge, and yet incidental at the same time. And here is what we know about the race so far: Hillary Clinton cannot win the pledged delegate count, and it’s looking more and more like the popular vote count (even if she wins PA, has FL handed to her and wins KY, PR and WV) will be out of her reach, as well. So, why is she still in this race? To try and prove to the superdelegates that they should overturn the popular vote and pledged delegate count and choose her as the candidate? Or are her reasons more insidious, as many believe, that she is still in this race to ruin Barack Obama for the General Election in hopes of running against McCain in 2012? One wonders in light of the events of this week.
The media goes back and forth on whether or not this protracted fight is good for the Democrats (whoever wins, most likely Obama, will be "vetted" and "tested" and ready for the General), or if it is indeed bad for the Democrats (whoever wins, most likely Obama, will be too bloodied to compete effectively in the General). No matter which narrative they argue from, the one constant is that logistically, there is no way for Hillary Clinton to win this election without the superdelegates giving her the nomination – what most in the media and a great portion of the populace would call "stealing" the nomination. This outcome has a very real possibility of unleashing unrest – not just outside the convention hall in Denver, but across the country. If this isn’t a perfect example of Hillary Clinton’s negatives, polarizing effect and divisiveness, than I don’t know what is.
These past two weeks, the Clinton campaign has done more to stir up the racial divide than the last two terms of bad Republican leadership has. If she becomes the nominee of this Party, she will have great trouble getting the black vote out come November. She will have great trouble getting the youth vote out come November. She will have great trouble getting many of Obama’s supporters out come November. She started the primary season with her negatives around 47%, and after the primary campaign she has run, that number is probably extremely inflated at this point. The data also looks as if she were able to pull in a higher percentage of white voters recently, but since just before March 4, when it became apparent that McCain had all but sealed up the Republican nomination, Rush Limbaugh successfully campaigned to get his listeners to "vote Hillary for a day." And I believe we’ve seen the fruits of that in MS where 24% of the white vote that came out for Clinton, when exit polled, said they wouldn’t want her as President. The numbers she pulled in Texas and Ohio will not be there for her in the General Election, because they were not "honest" votes. They were a game the Republicans are playing, and will continue to play, on us until they have effectively crippled our Party from the inside.
All of this leads to one thing. You have one candidate who has consistently, even as recently as the polls yesterday, polled winning numbers in a head-to-head with McCain. You have another that does not poll well against McCain. You have a candidate that has won more states, more of the popular vote, and more of the delegates. You have another that has won a couple of decisive wins recently, but whose numbers in those wins were inflated by Republican Party interference. You have one candidate who has steadily tried, and for the most part succeeded, in taking the high road, and keeping the politics about the issues. You have another that has stirred up an enormous amount of ill-feelings, ill-will and negativity in the electorate at large, and appears to be actively trying to discredit her fellow Party member in an effort to damage him irreparably should he, which he is likely to do, win the nomination. Based on this, we can no longer question what Hillary's strategy is, so the question becomes: do you care what Hillary is doing? And if you do care about its ruinous nature, are you going to do something about it? Or is the leadership going to stay silent, and let this continue, and thereby basically insure we lose the General Election. A bloodied, battle-weary, tired Obama who emerges from the convention at the end of August with just a month to campaign for the GE is almost certain to not make up the ground that will be lost to a well-rested, well-funded McCain who has had a FIVE month jump on his opponent in the race. A vindictive, angry, nominee-snatching Clinton who emerges from the convention at the end of August, will also have no time to make up the same lost ground, and will be so unappealing to a major portion of the base of the Democratic electorate, not to mention how unfavorable she is to the Independents and Moderates already, has virtually no chance of winning in the General election. She cannot turn those negatives around in 4 weeks. No one could. So this is what we will be left with: Senator Almost No Chance, and Senator No Chance. Again, I ask you – are you going to do something about it?