Well, it's been two months since I last wrote about the Democrats, but one would think that the only thing that's changed is that both candidates now have higher delegate counts, although Obama is now in much better shape. With only three contests remaining, he has a majority of pledged delegates attending the convention, a lead in superdelegates, and increasing media coverage labelling him as the presumptive nominee. He is now only fifty-seven delgates shy of the requisite 2026 needed to be nominated. Yet Clinton, who trails Obama by nearly 200 delegates, remains in the race, not because she has any real chance, but because she refuses to leave.
Let's face it, the only reason that Obama isn't already labelled the presumptive nominee by everyone is because no one wants to have to break it to the Clintons--and that includes Bill as much as it does Hillary. But as they become increasingly desperate to show by any way they can that Senator Clinton deserves the nomination, one wonders if it's time for someone to tell them to get out now with class than to drag this thing to the convention.
Recently she went so far as to claim that the Democrats need to change their nomination process, because the current one "fails to represent the will of the American voters." I quote,
“I think that’s an issue for debate in the future because I believe we should have primaries everywhere, and everybody, as many people as possible should be encouraged to vote...We ought to group them so that nobody is at the tail end, so everybody has a chance to participate. But that’s all for the future.”You know, I didn't realize Hillary was the champion of nomination reform until the current system gave someone like Obama the chance to turn over the establishment candidate. I mean, give me a break. Lets face it, if the primaries were all held on the same day, Clinton, with national name recognition and a convincing lead in polls, probably could have won the nomination outright. However, the spaced out nature of the nominating process allowed Obama to gain name recognition as he won contests, particulary his surprising win in the Iowa caucuses. Now, suddenly, it's not democratic to give relative unknowns the chance to win popular support?
What this comes down to is that Clinton feels that she deserves the nomination, and when the people chose someone else it was because of some flaw in the nominating system. Will it ever occur to her that the Democratic Party perhaps found someone they liked more? It's as if she's personally offended by this whole ordeal, and her arguments are tantamount to claiming that the votes of the people don't matter at all. Give it up, Hillary.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/24/clinton-democratic-nomination-process-needs-to-change/
7 comments:
Like it or not (and rest assured I don't), Clinton can still pull out on top. It is extremely unlikely, but also still possible. Under the Demoratic rules, delegates can change their minds whenever they want (as we've seen delegates coming over from the Clinton campaign to the Obama campain). Clinton is counting on this. If she can convince delegates that she is the better candidate, and if she can secure Michigan and Florida, then she still has a shot. Unlikely, still, but possible.
Of course it is possible, but at this point it seems unlikely that something would happen around Obama that would cause delegates to flock to Hillary instead. Even if Florida is counted, with its 211 delegates, Obama is likely to get the now 48 he needs between his Florida share and the remaining primaries. On the other hand, where is Clinton going to get the 250 delegates she needs, barring a total collapse of Obama? She can make the case that she is more electable, but based on their recent trends it seems very unlikely that the superdelegates will buy it. My point was that as it becomes exponentially more difficult to defend her case, she should stop trying to deny that the process chose someone else, do the honorable thing, and leave. If she is still running when Obama gains a majority of delegates, her only remaining chance is for Obama's image to drastically drop between now and the convention in August.
I correct myself--if Florida and Michigan are counted, the threshold would move up to 2210 delegates. However, these will still not bring her over the threshold, and in the end the superdelegates will likely go with the pledged delegates and the popular vote (both of which Obama leads if all the contests including Florida and the caucuses are counted--to include Michigan would be outrageous).
With the current delegate count, that's correct, Clinton could not overcome Obama. However, according to DNC rules, delegates can switch their vote up until the convention. Even "pledged delegates" can switch their votes. This is what Clinton is counting on, by talking about how she would be the better candidate in the general election. She's trying to appeal more to "super-delegates" now than to the general public.
I personally would like to see Clinton drop out, but at the same time (and this may be another topic), I feel that she has the right to stay in the race.
I thought this was very interesting:
http://www.journalism.org/node/11266
I recognize that any delegates can change their vote, and that Clinton can stay in the race for as long as she wants to, but how wise would that be? If she does pursuade delegates to change their allegiances, and by doing so somehow tips the balance in her favor, the party will not be able to regroup by November. In that case, all of Obama's supporters would be incredibly angry, and there's no way the Democrats can win without the bases of both candidates, even with Bush's record. Even if she is more electable, she won't win if that is how she's going to take the nomination. She's been too harsh on Obama already to be able to reconcile his supporters with what they would view as a complete usurpation.
Post a Comment