The Long Campaign Continues

It's been nearly a month since I last wrote, and at the end, nothing has changed.

Yes, we've had the revelation that Sen. Obama's spiritual guide, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright apparently asks God to damn America.

And yes, we've had Sen. Clinton's Bosnia fairytale (as Times columnist Frank Rich dubs it)—you know the one where she swears she (and Sinbad and Sheryl Crow) was under sniper-fire while visiting troops in Bosnia during her tenure as first lady. While this had been debunked months ago, the former first lady and former presumptive Democratic nominee for the presidency continued to spew such fibs. It took the CBS Evening News to go back to the pool video and show that Sen. Clinton indeed had a safe landing. She arrived in Bosnia with Chelsea. That CBS Evening News clip was promulgated by Drudge linking to the YouTube video of it. It got more views than Wright's fiery sermons.

It fit the narrative: Clinton's a liar. And isn't that a narrative that fits so well with that family that we're all too familiar with? It's her "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." It harkens back to the narrative that the Bush campaign pinged on Vice-President Gore back in 2000: Al Gore swore he invented the internet.

And everyone's talking about Bosnia and the Clinton campaign is saying that she misspoke and that it's all due to sleep deprivation…this coming from the candidate who said that she's the most prepared to answer that red phone at, yes, 3 in the morning.

And everyone's forgotten about Wright and about the watershed speech that Obama delivered concerning race. That speech, one of the greatest political speeches in a generation, will be only remembered by simple sound bites: "I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas" and "I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."

That's what happens when you schedule an important and long overdue speech on race in America, in the morning. Rookie mistake.

March wasn't a good month for either Democratic Candidate or the Democratic Party itself. It was full of gaffes and indecision.

***

But where do we go from here?

Clinton has said that she's not going to pull-out. Obviously. She's said that she was going to wait until the people have spoken. Yes, how noble of her. She was going to wait for Pennsylvania…and Puerto Rico to vote. June 3^rd is the last election. DNC Chairman Howard Dean wants this rapped up by July 1^st. But…Clinton spoke to the Washington Post today and said that she wasn't going to rest until Michigan and Florida are counted (where was she when the DNC disenfranchised millions of voters last fall?) and that if it had to come to it, well, that's what the Credentials Committee at the Convention is for. The Credentials Committee! She's going to see this through the very end and take the Democratic National Convention in Denver hostage. She will not give up. She will not surrender. Even if they count Florida and Michigan and even if she wins Pennsylvania, which she's likely to do, it doesn't add up. The delegate count just doesn't add up. It's not going to put her over the top. It's not going to change anything. She'll make the argument that she wins the big states and that she's won more recently—this even though today's revelation that because of the Texas "prima-caucus," Obama actually won there.

And that's the big problem. Bill Maher on Friday's show asked what the big deal was for Clinton to stay in and to allow the process to naturally unfold—to let the voters decide, to make every vote count. The process never unfolds naturally. No one likes a split convention. A couple of years ago I wrote an essay in which I compared the 1968 presidential election to every presidential we've had since. This paragraph is pertinent as to why the Democrats need a nominee by Convention time:

In the battle between perception and reality, it is also important to note the changes and evolutions in nominating conventions. Where 1952 was seen as the first televised convention, 1968 was the first dramatic one. Image-makers not only had to deal with a candidate's image, but also, with the image of the convention itself. Whereas in 1968 at Miami Beach, the Republicans presented a convention of unity and order, the convention at Chicago was anything but. Theodore White stated that "At Chicago, for the first time, the most delicate process of American politics was ruptured by violence, the selection of Presidents stained with blood." Americans were appalled at what was occurring on the streets in Chicago, and what was occurring inside the convention hall. Those watching Walter Cronkite's coverage on the CBS Television Network saw a young Dan Rather being punched on the floor of the Convention Hall and taken down by Convention security, "Cronkite then delivered one of those sound bites that get aired again and again for years to come: 'I think we've got a bunch of thugs in there, Dan'." Then and there, the Democrats' hope for a victory in 1968 ended. The Convention was in such a state of chaos that President Johnson—officially leader of the Democratic Party—did not attend the convention. In 1980, coupled with the important and salient background events which were occurring, there was discontent inside Madison Square Garden where the Democratic National Convention was held, after the sitting President, Jimmy Carter, was challenged by Sen. Edward Kennedy for the presidency, and at the end, we saw the famous image captured by television cameras which displayed the delicate waltz which took place by which Carter and Kennedy never shook hands on the convention stage. This event was seized by the pundits on television and re-played over-and-over again as a sign of disunity in the party. In 1992, it was the Republican's turn to seem extreme and not united. At the Astrodome in Houston, Texas, what was supposed to be a rousing night for Ronald Reagan's last speech at the Convention was split, with Reagan's speech being pushed to 11:00 p.m. and Pat Buchanan taking the 10:00 p.m. primetime hour. This push to a 10:00 p.m. slot made by the networks, especially NBC, cost Bush and his convention the image that they wanted to portray. NBC's executive producer, Bill Wheatley recalls that, "On two separate instances we saw them hold the convention waiting for us to come on the air…We were still in our opening when they introduced [Quayle]. There was this tremendous roar, and Tom [Brokaw] just picked it up." The one that really hurt Bush was Buchanan's speech which "after its opening applause lines for the nominee, went on to summon not only Buchanan's own following but the entire Republican Party to a 'religious war' against gays, inner-city toughs and the likes of Hillary Clinton." That same year at Madison Square Garden, the 1992 Democratic National Convention was perfectly orchestrated, went off without any serious gaffes, and was up-lifting and optimistic. The Republicans came back in 2000 and at Philadelphia, gave key-note speech slots to the likes of Colin Powell, John McCain, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr., and Condoleezza Rice. This created the image of a new, moderate Republican Party going along the theme of "Compassionate Conservatism" which Bush wanted to create. On the other hand, at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, there were undercurrents which pointed towards disunity in the party, when Bill Clinton was pushed to a Monday night speech, and then ignored for the rest of the convention. This went in line with the Gore Campaign wanting to distance themselves from Clinton for the General Election, and which many consider might have hurt Gore in his quest for the presidency.

Now I'm not saying that the Democratic Convention in Denver in 2008 will be just like the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968. I don't expect violence but I do expect political blood being spilt if Hillary Rodham Clinton takes this to the Credentials Committee and more so, if the Super-Delegates go contrary to whom the pledged Delegates chose. It would be a nomination stolen. If the Super-Delegates indeed overturn the voice of the people, if they overturn the people's choice, then what we will have will be the disenfranchisement anew of Democrats and a party uncontrollable. They'll be yelling bloody murder in the streets of Denver. They denied the first viable Black man the nomination for president of the United States. Obama's leading in the delegate count, most states won, and most votes cast. The Super-Delegates will have no choice but to re-affirm the pledged delegates, which then calls into question the reasoning for the Super-Delegates: if it's just to rubber-stamp and to be redundant…what's the point of their existence?

If Democrat's can't run their own convention, can't control their own people, what gives the American people the confidence that they can run a country?

And I echo David Brooks' belief (another Times columnist) who says that the reason that Hillary Clinton needs to get out is not because she's weak, but because she's strong. And yes, it's a little nonsequitor. Put aside the fact that in today's Gallup tracking poll Obama's lead over Clinton is now at 10-points, with her winning Pennsylvania and a handful of others, she'll continue to make the case that there's momentum for her now, that people want her in it, and that she'll be there for the people. There won't be any stopping her. She'll think that she's it, that she can turn this ship around, that she can salvage this ship who hit the iceberg long ago. It's delusional. She'll take this to the Convention and the whole world will watch what a split convention is. Can you just picture it? There might be walk-outs! Supporters of the losing candidate leaving the hall and the image replayed ad-nauseum on TV for everyone to see. Juxtapose that with McCain's convention. It'll be neat. It'll be orderly. It'll be just like the 2000 Republican love-fest in Philadelphia.

 

This was supposed to be the year of the Democratic Restoration. The economy is going south, the war has hit the 4,000^th American casualty, and the sitting Republican president remains unpopular. This was supposed to be the year of the Democratic Restoration.

It's amazing but the Democrats found a way to blow it again.

The Post Game Show: Super Tuesday

It's somewhat difficult to thoroughly describe all the moving parts right now. Who's winning? Who's losing? Who's about done? What actually happened last night?

***

The Republicans:

The Republican race is beginning to take on a narrative of inevitability for John McCain. NBC News projects that Sen. McCain has gathered 720 delegates, needing just 471 more delegates before he gets crowned in St. Paul this summer. Govs. Romney and Huckabee trail by a wide margin (256-194). John McCain, who's guerilla campaign in 2000 proved futile against the Bush machine now finds himself, eight years later, as the establishment candidate, the bona fide front-runner, the nominee presumptive of the Republican Party for the office of President of the United States. He is it. No matter the attacks that he's received from right-wing talk radio, especially Rush Limbaugh, the party will coalesce around the McCain candidacy on the assumption that he is indeed the most electable. McCain is sending out olive branches to the different sects which comprise the Republican Party.

Tomorrow, he'll make an appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington D.C., where he has never been a popular figure and has failed to attend the conference in recent years. There, McCain will take on the "Son of Reagan" attributes that he has cloaked around himself since his candidacy began. He'll make the argument that once again, he is a Conservative candidate in the race. Among Conservatives actually, exit polls suggest that McCain is not faring that badly. Among Evangelicals it becomes a different story. Evangelicals are the most loyal voting bloc in the Republican Party and what has prevented Romney from picking up any votes has been Huckabee's candidacy. It is telling that last night, McCain won in states that a Republican will find difficult, if not impossible, to win come November. He picked up New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, and California; while Huckabee did well in the Solid South, winning in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Arkansas, and West Virginia. Romney prevented humiliation by winning in Massachusetts where McCain had placed a last stand in an effort to strike a death blow to the Romney effort. Romney also did well in traditional Republican states such as Montana, North Dakota, and Utah (where he has a natural constituency).

John McCain is going to have to convince voters that he is one of them. At CPAC, he's going to roll out with a video showing him with Ronald Reagan, his campaign has deployed surrogates (see Dole, Bob) to trump up his Conservative credentials.

Huckabee had a great night last night. It's been the conventional wisdom that Huckabee would be a strong candidate for the Vice-Presidency—a possibility which grew with Huckabee's electoral victories on Super Tuesday. He showed that he's not a one-hit wonder, and that there are many Republican voters that are indeed attracted to his candidacy. Today Huckabee did the morning news shows making the point that while the mainstream media had written him off and made the Republican narrative a two-man race, that it was, and until now, remains a three-man race. Huckabee says that he's not done yet, but he'll pick up and end this in another month. He'll stay in just to show the establishment, and McCain himself, that he is indeed potent and viable.

Romney was supposed to be in meetings today with his staff engaging in "frank" discussions as to where his campaign goes from here. Romney sees the writing on the wall, and he's restrained himself in further attacking McCain. Romney will pull out before the Convention, since he does not want to be a spoiler of inevitability, and he's thinking about the future, four years down the line, eight years down the line, when the party becomes grateful for how he handled himself during this campaign and may indeed favor him for the nomination in the future.

This was always supposed to happen. The Republican Party is the party of order, organization, and hierarchy. The Republicans always crown an heir-apparent and create a standard-bearer. There's no chaos in the Republican Party. There's whose-turn-is-it-now. Over the last election cycles, it's been this way. This is the party that nominates George W. Bush. This is the party that nominates Bob Dole.

In fact, the last two times that there's been chaos at Republican Party conventions were because of Ronald Reagan. The first-time in 1976, the closest we've come to a floor-fight in recent years, occurred because Reagan was viable enough to mount an effort against the sitting president, Gerald Ford, for the nomination. At the end Ford won the nomination but lost the General Election against Jimmy Carter. In 1980, there were some moments of late-night drama when rumors hit the floor that Reagan was in talks with Ford to offer Ford the Vice-Presidency. The negotiations broke apart when no one could figure out exactly how Ford's vice presidency would practically work since he was a former president of the United States. Many spoke of co-presidencies (see Clinton, William J. and Hillary), and at the end, Reagan gave the vice presidency to George H.W. Bush who would create the linear path to the presidency for George W. Bush.

***

The Democrats:

I guess the biggest surprise from last night was Clinton's margin of victory in California. Once again, the "Shock Poll" that was splashed on Drudge all day was wrong. It was New Hampshire all over again. At the end of the day, Clinton won by 10 (52-42), with help from strong Hispanic support, a majority of women voters, and lower-than-expected African-American turnout. Obama won thirteen states, Clinton won 9. She won the big Democratic states, and Obama did well in traditional "Red" states.

The thing about the Democrats…they're tied.

Depending on which delegate projections you believe (I'm sticking with NBC's), it's thisclose. Some projections have Clinton +79. Others are not attempting to project whether the Super Delegates who pledged support will stick by the candidate in the future. Be it as it may, when it comes to delegates—and a Democrat needs 2,025 to win—it's a tie. Super Tuesday did not decide anything. It's made the race tighter, and it will make it longer. Next week the so-called "Potomac Primary" will take place, and many believe that Clinton and Obama will once again split the votes and the delegates there.

The Democrats have two candidates that resonate with their base this time. Nationwide, close to 14 million Democrats voted last night. Clinton won the popular vote by around 53,000 votes—or less than ½ of 1%. It's that close.

Howard Dean has already stated that if by May there's no clear front-runner, no clear winner—which there isn't at this point—that he'll try to step in and broker a deal in order to avoid a floor-fight at the Convention in Denver.

Chris Matthews tried to get his panel to declare who's the front-runner in the Democratic race. No one gave a clear answer. The front-runner is Barack Obama. What he pulled off last night was an astonishing feat. In states where just a couple of months ago he was 20 points, 30 points behind, he was able to narrow the margin, and indeed won some of them.

His biggest win was to ensure that Hillary Clinton is not the inevitable candidate anymore. New Hampshire made Hillary the second incarnation of the "Comeback Kid" but will the future prognostications hold? Conventional Wisdom holds that if Super Tuesday would've been next week and not last night, Obama might have indeed won big in California and in other states where he was making important gains. The momentum's with Obama. He is the knight, and his mission, his journey, as Maureen Dowd wrote today, is "to slay the dragon." And the Dragon can be slain. And the death blow will come not by a sword, but by a wallet.

Obama is about to raise another $30 Million this month. Previously he raised $32 Million in January. Since last night, he's raised $4 Million. His donors haven't been exhausted like Clinton's. Clinton has probably the best fund-raiser in the Democratic Party in the person of Terry McAuliffe, and he can't fundraise anymore. Clinton's donor rolls have been exhausted because most have given the allowable limit. It was shocking when Drudge had a red-colored alert all day today shouting to the world that Clinton had lent herself, err her campaign, $5 Million. That coupled with the news that some of her staffers are now working pro bono—going without pay for this month—suggests a campaign in crisis. Hillary Clinton, the once inevitable candidate, the long-time front-runner, has a cash flow problem. This doesn't happen to a front-runner. And we already had one Lazarus in this campaign.