Twisted Words, Popular Will and the Soul of the Democratic Nomination.
Is Barack Obama on the ropes? If he is, it's only because the media puts him there. Hillary Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary by 10 points, about what people had expected and a reasonable outcome considering that the state is full of the elderly and blue collar workers, her bread and butter. Obama's campaign was surely disappointed that it didn't get to within 6 percentage points of Clinton, which would have been his best-case scenario. Yet there were no surprises in the outcome.
Over the past couple of days the press has widely written that Obama has lost momentum, and that doubts have resurfaced about his electability in a presidential race. These concerns, however, are spin from the Clinton campaign, and don't reflect the the reality of the polls, which show that Obama would fare better against McCain than Clinton would. (Check RealClearPolitics.com for a list of national polls).
I have no explanation, then, for the way in which Clinton's contentions have apparently been taken seriously by the press. It could be that many journalists, being close to the news and newsmakers, readily get caught up in the hype and forget to keep perspective. Maybe editors looking to sell newspapers and boost online page views push for contentious headlines. It's very likely that, following the North Carolina primary where Obama is expected to win by a big margin, the same journalists will be writing that Clinton's momentum suddenly ran out. No one will ask whether that momentum ever existed. Remember, superdelegates have been turning to Obama increasingly in recent weeks.
Obama and Clinton are pretty similar in most of their politics, save their history on the Iraq war. When it comes to affordable healthcare, dealing with the housing crisis or reining in Wall Street greed that led to so many mortgage busts, the two have similar ideas.
The media focuses on talk of momentum. Who has it, who doesn't, who appears to be a snob and who does the better impression of being simple folk. So over the past few weeks I've avoided the front page of the newspaper, turned off the TV and radio. The issues that are key in the Democratic race for nomination are clear to me, but the media seems intent on confusing matters with the latest innuendo.
What is the real substance of this election, the factor that finally divides Obama and Clinton? It's character, and on this point Obama has the upper hand. He has done his best to shy away from negativity in his campaign, and he energetically denounced the politics of his former pastor, rightly pointing out that you can be close to a person without believing the same things they do. Everyone has had relationships like this. He has attempted to engage in nuanced discussions on race, bringing fresh ideas to a nation bludgeoned for eight year by the simplistic "us or them" rhetoric of President Bush. His comment on guns, religion and anger, waved about by Clinton as sure sign of a candidate out of touch was in fact dead on, even if Obama could have shown better judgement in the way he made his statements.
I haven't heard an ounce of substance out of Clinton for months. She has continually pledged a clean, positive campaign, only to launch a backhanded attack at Obama the person the following day. Most cynical, however, is Clinton's push to become the democratic presidential nominee against the wishes of Democratic voters. Clinton trails in the popular vote as well as in pledged delegates. There is very little chance that the Indiana and North Carolina primaries will change this.
Clinton's only hope is the superdelegates, the ranking members of the Democratic party who in theory could defy public opinion and cast their vote in her favor, thereby handing her the nomination. Clinton understands that, were a clear majority of the remaining elite superdelegates to vote in her favor, they would be voting against the preference of the bulk of Democratic voters (See RealClearPolitics.com for the Democratic popular vote numbers). Yet Clinton woos the superdelegates as the key to her nomination, the will of the people be damned. Through her willingness to trash Obama's character in a desperate attempt to lure superdelegates, and drag her party through the mud, she has proven that she ultimately serves no one but herself.
Over the past couple of days the press has widely written that Obama has lost momentum, and that doubts have resurfaced about his electability in a presidential race. These concerns, however, are spin from the Clinton campaign, and don't reflect the the reality of the polls, which show that Obama would fare better against McCain than Clinton would. (Check RealClearPolitics.com for a list of national polls).
I have no explanation, then, for the way in which Clinton's contentions have apparently been taken seriously by the press. It could be that many journalists, being close to the news and newsmakers, readily get caught up in the hype and forget to keep perspective. Maybe editors looking to sell newspapers and boost online page views push for contentious headlines. It's very likely that, following the North Carolina primary where Obama is expected to win by a big margin, the same journalists will be writing that Clinton's momentum suddenly ran out. No one will ask whether that momentum ever existed. Remember, superdelegates have been turning to Obama increasingly in recent weeks.
Obama and Clinton are pretty similar in most of their politics, save their history on the Iraq war. When it comes to affordable healthcare, dealing with the housing crisis or reining in Wall Street greed that led to so many mortgage busts, the two have similar ideas.
The media focuses on talk of momentum. Who has it, who doesn't, who appears to be a snob and who does the better impression of being simple folk. So over the past few weeks I've avoided the front page of the newspaper, turned off the TV and radio. The issues that are key in the Democratic race for nomination are clear to me, but the media seems intent on confusing matters with the latest innuendo.
What is the real substance of this election, the factor that finally divides Obama and Clinton? It's character, and on this point Obama has the upper hand. He has done his best to shy away from negativity in his campaign, and he energetically denounced the politics of his former pastor, rightly pointing out that you can be close to a person without believing the same things they do. Everyone has had relationships like this. He has attempted to engage in nuanced discussions on race, bringing fresh ideas to a nation bludgeoned for eight year by the simplistic "us or them" rhetoric of President Bush. His comment on guns, religion and anger, waved about by Clinton as sure sign of a candidate out of touch was in fact dead on, even if Obama could have shown better judgement in the way he made his statements.
I haven't heard an ounce of substance out of Clinton for months. She has continually pledged a clean, positive campaign, only to launch a backhanded attack at Obama the person the following day. Most cynical, however, is Clinton's push to become the democratic presidential nominee against the wishes of Democratic voters. Clinton trails in the popular vote as well as in pledged delegates. There is very little chance that the Indiana and North Carolina primaries will change this.
Clinton's only hope is the superdelegates, the ranking members of the Democratic party who in theory could defy public opinion and cast their vote in her favor, thereby handing her the nomination. Clinton understands that, were a clear majority of the remaining elite superdelegates to vote in her favor, they would be voting against the preference of the bulk of Democratic voters (See RealClearPolitics.com for the Democratic popular vote numbers). Yet Clinton woos the superdelegates as the key to her nomination, the will of the people be damned. Through her willingness to trash Obama's character in a desperate attempt to lure superdelegates, and drag her party through the mud, she has proven that she ultimately serves no one but herself.
posted by CatZoo at 2:40 PM
0 comments
