Why Obama Should Quit

DALLAS--

In American political lore we're enamored by the possibility of the underdog defeating the establishment.

I think that's because America still sees itself as the ultimate underdog in the world. But we're the underdog that wins. We're noble and good, and we're faced with a world full of evil tyrants who cause pain, agony, despair. And we'll use our military for humanitarian needs and nation-building when necessary and we'll raise money and donate, and provide food and medicine, and still wave the flag of America and all that it represents. Don't you forget it, no matter what, we're still the United States of America—the last best chance the world has.

It takes a special kind of person to lead the United States of America. We want Saints not Sinners. We want Angels not Demons.

And that's why in some corners we wanted Barack Obama. He seemed so unlike anything we've ever had. He is so unlike anything we've ever had. The press fell in love with him. New voters all across America fell in love and packed stadiums nationwide, from the metropolitan coastal cities to cities in the heartland which still believed in a place called hope. He was it. He brought people from across the political spectrum and promised them that "Yes, we can." That yes, we can bring about change; that yes, there was a better way. And people believed him. They still do. I still do.

But then we saw Rev. Wright who came out of his self-imposed exile this weekend and brought his controversy back to the front of the political fore. Jeremiah Wright was a reminder of the unfounded fears that some Americans have about Barack Obama. They see him as something alien, they think he's a Muslim, there's a church that put on its sign "Obama-Osama: Are They Brothers?" Americans fear what they do not know. And it didn't help that Obama is seen as unpatriotic. Making a point causes him to lose political traction. Why won't he just wear the flag lapel? And why did Michelle Obama say that for the first time ever she's proud of her country and that America in 2008 is a mean country? These are things you do not say when your husband is running for President of the United States. Not wearing the flag lapel is something that you do not do if you're running for President of the United States.

But he seemed to overcome it all. In fact, in today's NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll, Obama still leads Clinton nationwide 46-43% (one must take into account that there was an oversample of Black voters in this poll).But he hasn't won in a while. Yes, he still leads among delegates, among the popular vote and among most states won. But he lost in Pennsylvania and he lost badly. Indiana, neighboring his home state of Illinois, is now in play and Hillary seems to be a contender there. North Carolina down the road may follow South Carolina and give Obama a win. In a previous post I wrote that Hillary should quit not because she was losing but because she was going to gain traction and momentum and win. She has. There's going to be no stopping Hillary now, no matter what. It's too close. This reflects what I wrote in another previous post reflecting on why he can't put her away, and all those factors remain. The Clinton Political War Machine is a force to be reckoned with. Obama still seems too much of a lightweight, too much of an amateur to go against the Clintonistas.

And Obama isn't gaining in the demographics that he needs to win. His sub-constituency coalition is falling apart. He's not targeting the right voters. In South Carolina he was winning among White Men. In union-strong Pennsylvania he lost them. Lately, he's only winning among Blacks, and among the more educated Democratic primary voters. Hillary's winning everything else.

It seems counter-intuitive to suggest that the frontrunner quit. A frontrunner hasn't faced an internal challenge this strong and this heated for the nomination in a while. Hillary believes that this is rightfully hers. She believed that she worked too hard, waited so long and poured so much money and heart and tears (oh the tears!) into this that it's not fair that it's being taken away from her. She's going to stay in this. Dean can't make her get out no matter how much he's telling the super-delegates to have this wrapped up by mid-June. Hillary's expanding, there's no question about it, and she's out to swift-boat Obama before the Republicans get to him. Say what you want about Republicans but we're great at winning elections. Hillary and Bill always knew this and they've always tried to be Republicanesque in how they conduct a viable electoral strategy. Hillary went on O'Reilly tonight for God's sake…

Obama's inability to put her away casts doubt in his ability to win a general election campaign against John McCain this November. McCain gets independents, the Republicans are going to come out for him, and he may even get a substantial Democrat vote. And this is the reason why Obama should quit. Give it to Hillary. McCain-Clinton. Nothing will bring out Republicans in droves to vote for McCain than to have a Clinton on the ballot. They'll come out strong. And in every head-to-head matchup McCain beats Clinton. McCain ties Obama. McCain beats Clinton is the operative event though. It's in Obama's best interest to win the nomination clean and easily. He already fought for this one. Giving this to Hillary makes him noble, makes him a saint, makes him an angel, makes him a gentleman. He showed deference and the party is never going to forget that. He brought the Democratic Party together again. To say nothing of the possibility that McCain might not run for re-election because of his age in 2012. Obama's still a young man. He can wait. The Democratic Party, historically, never forgives its losers. It's not the era of Adlai Stevenson anymore where he kept running over-and-over again. The Democrats give you one chance and you're out. Give Hillary this one. Give it to her and she'll be out and retreat into the hallow chambers of the United States Senate and the Clinton name will become nothing more than an afterthought. Give Obama 4 years to rebuild, regroup, and re-inspire. He'll be stronger in 4 years, he'll be ready. He won't be making amateur mistakes and he'll be the leader that we all expect him to be, that we all know he can be.

So Sen. Obama give it to Sen. Clinton. Her new narrative is the one in which she states ad nauseum that she's the only one that can defeat Sen. McCain. Show America that she's wrong. Show America that ultimately, she's not a winner, but a loser. Show the Democrats how their inability to decide cost them yet another election. Be gracious. Be ready for your turn.

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.