Ever since last Tuesday I've been hearing pundits credit positively (= without the shadow of a doubt) Obama with the nomination. Super-delegates that had been holding out their decision are flocking to Barack Obama (before its too late for them to get any credit out of it), the figures indicate that regardless of what happens in the last States, Obama will soon reach the threshhold of 2,250 pledged delegates. 
And yet, oblivious and dismissive of all these petty facts and figures Sen. Clinton is racing on, campaigning in West Virginia today ; and in her speeches she shows no sign of giving up, she seems as fired up as ever. She is presenting the all-white and mostly working-class State of West-Virginia which is home to almost as many senior citizens as Florida, as yet another must win State (a bellwether State). In the polls, she had a huge lead over her opponent. She reminded her audience that no Democrat had ever won the White House without winning West-Virginia's 5 electoral vote in the general election. Is she suggesting that if Barack Obama loses the W.V. primary to her, it means that he won't win in November? Similarly, when Sen. Clinton highlights Sen. Obama's inability to conquer the hard-working whites ( she quoted an article and declared : "Sen Obama's support among working, hard working Americans, white Americans is weakening again") not only is she painting his constituency as solely composed of high-flying elitist liberals, soft-working students and bums and Blacks. Is she playing the race card? Read a Polico Blog on this or listen to NPR's News and Notes.
All this looks a bit like she's trying to discredit him for November, she doesn't want her boat to sink alone, does she? Is she preparing Obama's defeat to cast herself as the saviour of the Democratic Party in 2012, as has been suggested by some commentors.
Next post will be on John McCain: it's been too long since I blogged about him. What do you want to hear about?
7 comments:
Now that Barack Obama is pretty sure to be the democrate candidate for the presidential election, I wonder how the democrat are going to resolve those 2 issues:
Firstly, Obama and Clinton have fought a lot, and being in campaign meant for them, attacking the other and insisting on the weak points of each others and on the different points of view ichit raises a problem: how to reconcile everybody? Would they be forced to round off angles to 'faire bonne figure' or will Obama have to make without Clinton's support and therefore without an important part of the demoncrat?
Secondly, we can wonder how this presidential election will finish. Indeed, at the beginning, most people were very enthousiast because the two main character were a woman and a Black people, but now the question is: is a Black people able to gain, now, the support of the American people... That raises a lot of questions. For instance, we have to remember that people do not always tell the truth: maybe people who are interviewed does not assume they don't want a Black people as head of state and the 'Obamania' may be a myth... So today, I'm starting to wonder if Obama is able to face Mc Cain...
Hello Anissa,
I delighted to read your comment and to see that you still visit the blog!
I think you are raising precisely the crucial issues that now face the democratic party.
How will Barack Obama's apparent "post-racial" campaign go down with the Americans. Are the preferences of the most commited members of the Democratic Party, who participate in the primaries, extendable to America as whole. Moreover as you point out, we don't know exactly how the supporters of Hillary will react in the general election, although I doubt they would vote for John McCain out of pure spite.
I tend to believe that the outcome of the election will depend on what central issues emerge in the campaign. Equally determining will be the process, and how the campaign fighting plays out ( will Rev. Wright be a big issue, will experience be what voters are after...)
Do you believe in what's been referred to as the "dream ticket" ( Clinton as Obama's VP)? I don't think it's very likely but some Democrats are hoping for such a solution and some pundits are trying to explain why Clinton is still in the race by saying that she staying the course in order to get offered a place on the ticket in exchange for her support. And recently, Bill Clinton has been waving the idea around.
Hello Professor,
Thank you for answering my questions.
This morning, the French VP of the Democrat party abroad was interviewed during a TV show about the Democrat meeting that held yesterday. She said that the decision of Hillary Clinton to keep on the run may hide the fact that she may be seeking for the next Presidential election and that is why she doesn't want to give up the race even if she is mathematically out.
Do you think it is her ambition? And do you think it is a sensible choice?
Dear Anissa,
That's a very good question, thank you for fuelling the discussion.
Indeed, there is a lot of speculation going on to try and make sense out of her staying in the race at this point.
If indeed the hypothesis that Clinton continues to run to make clear that she is a strong candidate and to suggest that she will run again in 2012 is true it means is that she is predicting, and counting on the defeat of Obama in November (usually incumbent Presidents running in their party's primary have no difficulty winning the said primary). In other words, this idea of her 2012 run is based on the beleif that the Democrats will lose. If we push this logic a bit further, we can say that it is in the interest of Clinton that Obama fails to win the White House. Now, if all this is true, what does this reveal about Hillary Clinton?
So, I wonder would it really serve her image in the long run ? And if this is her strategy, is it a wise?
The Democrats have better hope that this is not what her refusing to step down is about.
As far as I'm concerned I think that she is taking the wrong way. Indeed, by persisting in acting so she appears as someone with personnal ambition who doesn't care about the interest of the Democrat party.
I think she would better support Obama for this time and if she is lucky she could become his VP and maybe have the same fate that Al Gore with her husband, hoping that the following Presidential election would be in her favour.
As far as I'm concerned I think that she is taking the wrong way. Indeed, by persisting in acting so she appears as someone with personnal ambition who doesn't care about the interest of the Democrat party.
I think she would better support Obama for this time and if she is lucky she could become his VP and maybe have the same fate that Al Gore with her husband, hoping that the following Presidential election would be in her favour.
I certainly agree with you; Hillary Clinton should bow out graciously. But the Clinton camp is not very good at admitting defeat !
Today, the last two primaries are taking place, let's see what she says tonight...
Post a Comment