Take a deep breath ...
OK, so we Obama supporters were denied a blowout last night, and
Senator Clinton lives to fight another day. After my initial (profound)
disappointment over this fact, I decided that, to save my sanity and
health, I would trust in my preferred candidate to take these losses as
a learning experience, figure out what went wrong (and what Clinton did
right), and refine his strategy so that he can go on and win the
nomination. After all, if our candidate is so fragile that he cannot
withstand a few losses (in the popular vote), then he certainly is not
going to be able to withstand the barrage and assault that the
Republicans have in store for him.
I know that the Obama camp is in spin mode (as is the Clinton camp), and they are correct - it is about delegates, and Clinton did little to cut into Obama's relatively substantial lead in pledged delegates. But we also have to give credit to Clinton for winning both Ohio and Texas - yes, she went negative; yes, she was unfair; yes, she engaged in fear-mongering; yes, Rush Limbaugh may have had something to do with her win in Texas . However, whatever the reasons, she achieved what she wanted (had) to and has no plans to drop out of the race. So, we're on to Pennsylvania (and, of course Wyoming and Mississippi before that). Congratulations to Senator Clinton for her victories and congratulations to all Clinton supporters. It's been a long time between wins for her and I'm sure you are much relieved and happy for your candidate.
This was the first real test of Obama as frontrunner, and I think he did admirably - he cut deeply into her lead in both Ohio and Texas (both states where, only a couple of weeks ago, she was predicted to win by double digits), and he maintained his comfortable delegate margin. He also responded to the negative ads, false innuendo, and "NAFTA-gate" forcefully but with dignity and without getting down into the dirt with her. I respect and admire him for that. His spokeperson (I think it was Axelrod) stated last night on MSNBC that they will respond to Clinton's "kitchen sink" in their own way, and I have no doubt that they will be revamping and retooling their campaign going forward so that they are not caught off-guard by anything her campaign chooses to throw at him. In some ways, these losses, and the continued campaign, will toughen him up and make him a stronger candidate.
I do have a few things to say, however, about Mrs. Clinton's victory speech last night and the implications for the next seven or so weeks. Given the tone and timbre of her speech, this campaign is going to get dirtier and more negative. She did not even have the grace and class to congratulate Senator Obama on his win in Vermont (whereas, he was very careful to congratulate her, both for Rhode Island and for Ohio, which hadn't even been called yet). However, she made a point of congratulating Senator McCain (again aligning herself with a Republican against a fellow Democrat). In my opinion, over the past couple of weeks she has shown her true colors - she is a ruthless politician who will stop at nothing to achieve her objective, even if it means falsely maligning and betraying another Democrat and perhaps doing lasting damage to the party. That may be an admirable quality to some people, but that's not the kind of Democrat I want leading my party. It seems that the Democratic voters do not want this primary season to end yet, and that is wonderful on many levels, because it means that we are listening and really thinking hard about who we want to represent us. However, I do NOT believe that most Democratic voters want the Clinton campaign to continue falsely maligning and smearing her rival, either. Those millions of new voters that Obama is bringing into the party are not going to stick around if she persists with this tactic, and she will find herself in big trouble in November, if she wins the nomination, without the ability to count on these new voters (to say nothing of independents, who will simply vote for McCain).
So, here's hoping that the Clinton campaign and its supporters show a little dignity and respect going forward. Let's try to elevate the dialog, focus on the issues, and not resort to name-calling, insults and smears. It is fine to be passionate about your candidate (I know I am). However, we're losing our perspective (and, most of all, our sense of humor), and we're doing what we've always accused the right wing of doing - sniping, in-fighting, nastiness. Can we all pull back now, take a deep breath, and gain a little objectivity after last night? I hope so for the future of our party and our country.
I know that the Obama camp is in spin mode (as is the Clinton camp), and they are correct - it is about delegates, and Clinton did little to cut into Obama's relatively substantial lead in pledged delegates. But we also have to give credit to Clinton for winning both Ohio and Texas - yes, she went negative; yes, she was unfair; yes, she engaged in fear-mongering; yes, Rush Limbaugh may have had something to do with her win in Texas . However, whatever the reasons, she achieved what she wanted (had) to and has no plans to drop out of the race. So, we're on to Pennsylvania (and, of course Wyoming and Mississippi before that). Congratulations to Senator Clinton for her victories and congratulations to all Clinton supporters. It's been a long time between wins for her and I'm sure you are much relieved and happy for your candidate.
This was the first real test of Obama as frontrunner, and I think he did admirably - he cut deeply into her lead in both Ohio and Texas (both states where, only a couple of weeks ago, she was predicted to win by double digits), and he maintained his comfortable delegate margin. He also responded to the negative ads, false innuendo, and "NAFTA-gate" forcefully but with dignity and without getting down into the dirt with her. I respect and admire him for that. His spokeperson (I think it was Axelrod) stated last night on MSNBC that they will respond to Clinton's "kitchen sink" in their own way, and I have no doubt that they will be revamping and retooling their campaign going forward so that they are not caught off-guard by anything her campaign chooses to throw at him. In some ways, these losses, and the continued campaign, will toughen him up and make him a stronger candidate.
I do have a few things to say, however, about Mrs. Clinton's victory speech last night and the implications for the next seven or so weeks. Given the tone and timbre of her speech, this campaign is going to get dirtier and more negative. She did not even have the grace and class to congratulate Senator Obama on his win in Vermont (whereas, he was very careful to congratulate her, both for Rhode Island and for Ohio, which hadn't even been called yet). However, she made a point of congratulating Senator McCain (again aligning herself with a Republican against a fellow Democrat). In my opinion, over the past couple of weeks she has shown her true colors - she is a ruthless politician who will stop at nothing to achieve her objective, even if it means falsely maligning and betraying another Democrat and perhaps doing lasting damage to the party. That may be an admirable quality to some people, but that's not the kind of Democrat I want leading my party. It seems that the Democratic voters do not want this primary season to end yet, and that is wonderful on many levels, because it means that we are listening and really thinking hard about who we want to represent us. However, I do NOT believe that most Democratic voters want the Clinton campaign to continue falsely maligning and smearing her rival, either. Those millions of new voters that Obama is bringing into the party are not going to stick around if she persists with this tactic, and she will find herself in big trouble in November, if she wins the nomination, without the ability to count on these new voters (to say nothing of independents, who will simply vote for McCain).
So, here's hoping that the Clinton campaign and its supporters show a little dignity and respect going forward. Let's try to elevate the dialog, focus on the issues, and not resort to name-calling, insults and smears. It is fine to be passionate about your candidate (I know I am). However, we're losing our perspective (and, most of all, our sense of humor), and we're doing what we've always accused the right wing of doing - sniping, in-fighting, nastiness. Can we all pull back now, take a deep breath, and gain a little objectivity after last night? I hope so for the future of our party and our country.
Advertisement
This is a great post and sums up my feelings as well.
To be clear: My main objective is to win in November. We must not lose sight of that goal.
However, with this primary process going all the way to the convention, I am concerned that the party will fracture, and that was not a fear I had yesterday.
I some ways, Hillary's victories last night gave her supporters "false hope": and by that, I mean they hope she now can win the nomination without fracturing the party.
I'm not so sure.
March 5, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
All she needs is a winning coalition. When the black women come back -- and they will -- it will be all over for McCain. The rest of you can go your own way. We'll do it with the women, the Hispanics, the old people and the working class. Sound familiar. In case you don't recognize it, it's called the base of the Democratic Party. College students and educated, upper-class white men are welcome too.
March 5, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
And I wouldn't rule out black men coming back to Hillary either, even though Rep. Clyburn says they may be too depressed to vote and Doug Wilder says they'll be rioting in the streets if the super delegates select Clinton. I'm not sure Clinton is the one who has been fracturing the Party.
March 5, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Billy, you won't do it with this woman, and I know there are a lot of other women out there who feel the same way. And good for you for disenfranchising an entire new generation of voters (not to mention the African-American vote). That will get you very far...
The base of the Democratic party worked really well for the Dems in 2000 and 2004, didn't it? Just saying...
March 5, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
You don't include black women in the African American vote? As for your vote, that's yours to do what you want with.
March 5, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know, Carol. I just got something. You actually think someone saying they don't need your vote is somehow disenfranchising you. How is it disenfranchising an entire new generation of voters to say you don't care who they vote for? It's your vote. Nobody wants to take it away, and nobody needs it to win the general election. As a woman who does not support Hillary Clinton you are in a rapidly shrinking minority.
March 5, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Carol, congratulations on your first few diaries. I like your articulate and thoughtful, respectful style, and appreciate your much-needed "take a deep breath" message. I think sometimes we do need to step away and regain perspective, and I freely confess that much of my own angst is rooted in a desperate desire to see this country move away from the uglier toxic side of politics that has hobbled us for quite a long time now. It's interesting to think that my own state of Oregon could actually have some relevance this election cycle as we await a May primary.
Who do I want answering the phone at 3 a.m.? Well -- someone who wouldn't go catatonic a la My Pet Goat -- but who could immediately pick up another phone to the best Number One or team of Number Ones possible, say "meet me in my Ready Room," be able to get the best intelligence possible, possess enough ego-strength and objectivity to be able to weigh dissenting opinions, to have the keenness of mind to synthesize the information and brainstorm possible courses of action, balancing strong reasoning abilities with true wisdom and an unwavering moral compass, to behave with dignity and sang-froid even under the most trying circumstances, to know when to take the reins, and when to trust the team to "Make it so," and to discern those situations when a painstaking effort is required to build bridges to communication and cooperation, even with one's enemies.
Oh . .. wait . . I know! I want Captain Piccard to answer the phone!!! (Or Captain Janeway would be equally fine.)
Well, perhaps my ideals of leadership have been influenced more by fictional characters, which might seem like a sorry commentary, but there ARE real-life heroes who come to mind when I think of Obama's emphasis in human potential as a cornerstone of his leadership philosophy. There's Greg Mortenson, whose book "Three Cups of Tea" left me dumbfounded. He embodies the archetype of "the reluctant hero" (at least at the crossroads), but whose amazing accomplishments went far beyond what he himself could have imagined, and with the help of people (some of whom initially viewed him with suspicion and even hostility) whose trust and cooperation he earned with his unwavering respectful approach and sincere altruism. Then there's the medical service group profiled on the last "60 Minutes" who devote their time tending to the health needs of those forgotten or marginalized in our own America.
When Obama speaks in terms of being the change we want to see in the world, these aren't just empty words to me. Whether these words are based on the Dalai Lama's "Be the change you seek in the world" or other spiritual leaders, or the song "Let peace begin with me" or the philosophy of "Namaste" or the Prayer of St. Francis -- this philosophy isn't just the province of religion, but rather one that could serve us well from a purely humanistic perspective. I ask myself: if I take Obama's words to heart, what does that look like, and how do I put that into practice? It's a question that demands something of me, and my answer goes something like -- it starts with how I treat other people -- how do I SPEAK to them -- how do I recognize and honor their intrinsic worth as human beings -- whether in my own household or workplace or on the street, or whether they are strangers whom I encounter on blogs or ??? Whether they believe as I do, or behave in ways I find becoming? How do I improve my own stewardship of this earth? What role do I play in my own corner of the world, no matter how small, when it comes to making this world a better place? Am I setting aside some of time, money and talents to make a difference in the lives of others? How am I exercising my civic rights and responsibilities? And on and on . . ..
I can only answer those questions for myself, and I acknowledge my own flaws and inconsistencies. I have work to do, but hey -- practice practice practice!
I do wonder what our world would be like if everyone asked those same questions of themselves, and acted accordingly? If we approached politics, or conflict resolution, or international diplomacy, redressing social inequities, etc., in a healthier more productive way than we have been? Does this fall into the "sounds crazy but just might work" category?
This isn't just Kumbaya thinking, I've worked in government myself, and that experience has heavily influenced my ideas of what personal qualities I value in a leader. My philosophy of leadership is very much influenced by having observed the very real power of inclusive government, those instances where public officials can tap into human potential, and capitalize on the grass-roots community involvement as a component in the "solutions" business.
Naturally I have some healthy reservations about Obama; my support of him is not unconditional and is not based on a superficial Couch Potato/MSM research method. I hope to see Obama's campaign hewing to the high road as much as possible, and stay true to his principles. I find a button-pushing belly-bumping contest to be just "more of the same" distasteful stuff.
As for Hillary, I respect those who support her candidacy and I vow to be especially vigilant against the kind of angst and ego that leads to unnecessary and unkind comments. I do perceive and acknowledge her strengths -- and the possibility she could be a good president (she certainly won't have any My Pet Goat moments) . . . but in trying to make a case for herself as a candidate, she is -- in my mind -- drawing too many unfavorable comparisons to the "politics as usual" hubristic features of the Bush/Rove types that I find very discouraging.
I don't say this with any notion that my vote or non-vote matters to anyone but me, and I do apologize that my musings are overly long but I did want to support you in your posting, Carol, and to say thank-you for your thoughts.
March 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Carol - In your rush to smear Hillary Clinton you fudged the facts a little didn't you? While Senator Clinton did make a generic congratulations to Senator McCain, for achieving his party's apparent nomination, before a crowd of her supporters in Columbus last night, it was your candidate who told his supporters that he placed a personal phone call to Senator McCain to congratulate him.
Who is it that is "again aligning himself with a Republican against a fellow Democrat"?
Why don't you get your facts right before you waste our time with your opinions.
March 5, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's wrong with calling Sen. McCain? He also, before that statement, very clearly congratulated Clinton on her victory in RI and her probable victory in Ohio. You can spin and make believe all you want - the facts are the facts. Listen to the two speeches and then come back and tell me I'm wrong. Until then, please don't waste our time with your fantasies.
March 5, 2008 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink