Where the Democratic nomination process goes from here is to a very nasty place. There's no way that Hillary can make up all of the delegate gap, but she has clamped down on this bone and will not let go, the Democratic party be damned. I happened to tune into the MSNBC coverage last night (Matthews, Russert, Olberman, Andrea Mitchell - whose disdain for Hillary Clinton seems almost palpable), and what came through very strongly in their analysis - much of which I found spot-on - was how much Hillary relishes going for the jugular and feels almost entitled to be the nominee, how much Obama (much to his credit, but perhaps to his undoing) is trying to stick to the high road to preserve his image as someone who bridges divides and brings people together, and how much Hillary can double-team with McCain to bring down Obama, whom the Republicans must see as the more dangerous contender (and every poll I've seen so far supports that; Obama would knock off McCain handily, but McCain just might eat Hillary's lunch.).
The MSNBC pundits (Matthews especially) were also noting that the final decision might be thrown into the court of the superdelegates, and that they might push the nomination toward Clinton - but in that case, the new and young voters that Obama has brought into the party and the political process might react with such anger that they'd not come out in November, or even might vote for McCain (the many Obama Republicans among them). After all, why engage in the process when, at the end of the primaries, the final selection of the candidate had been made, not by them, the voters, but by a non-elected so-called Democratic elite? Those young voters are the future of the Democratic party, perhaps of the country, perhaps a last hope for restoring some vitality and integrity to US democracy, but Hillary Clinton seems willing to throw all that under the bus for the sake of her personal ambition - and, let's face it, her husband's as well. But, after all, isn't it supposed to be about the future of the country, and not about the restoration of the Clintons to power?
Speaking of which . . . and this is my nastier side coming out, but under the circumstances I just can't help it . . . Hillary evidently got some considerable mileage out of the "3 AM phone call" ad: what will happen when the phone rings in the White House at 3 AM if the president who picks up isn't ready to respond? Hillary was obviously going after Obama's putative inexperience and lack of preparation.
So, why couldn't Obama run the same ad, but have a blonde Hillary stand-in, waking from a deep sleep, pick up the phone, hear the message, then turn to the man next to her in bed and plead, "Bill, oh my God, what'll we do?!"
(This, of course, may require for some a willing suspension of disbelief, in that it assumes that Bill is sleeping with Hillary in the first place.)
- ► 2012 (165)
- ► 2011 (339)
- ► 2010 (305)
- ► 2009 (440)
- Crisis unfolds in Iraq
- Basra's turmoil
- A new monkey-wrench in the works? (or stick in the...
- In this season of peace . . .
- A must-read in today's Washington Post
- Old hatreds - and "Deciders" - persist
- And this guy wants to be president?!
- NY Times asks the "experts" for retrospectives on ...
- Fine review of a book that will draw notice
- US launches deadly missile strike into Pakistan
- Bush on serving in Afghanistan
- Iran elections; Iraq violence increasing; and pros...
- 12 March: the US loses a leader
- JR's recommended reading for Monday, 10 March
- excellent essay by Gideon Levy, in Haaretz
- Israel approves West Bank construction
- On the Jerusalem Seminary Shootings
- Dark Days, about to get darker
- The USS Cole and "Syrian behavior"
- "Moving to Baghdad" - a must-read piece in today's...
- Clinton v. Obama: Now what?
- Identity crisis for young Iraqis?
- Will Iraqis really "like" America once the America...
- more comment on the situation in Gaza
- The Gaza Genocide
- The Bullies Converge. The Results are Deadly.
- ▼ March (26)