Obama should raise the stakes with more tact
I'm an Obama supporter, but I found the argument expressed in the latest New Rules by Bill Maher to be a very persuasive one:
The move by Obama surrogates to call for Hillary to drop out does seem like not only a miscalculation, but a fairly wimpy move. And Obama's quickness in saying she can stay in as long as she likes suggests he knew that sort of talk might rub a lot of people the wrong way (especially those Democratic voters who haven't had the opportunity to vote yet).
Still, the idea that the nominee should be decided upon before this battle ends up at the convention is a very reasonable one. And for either candidate to indicate an earlier ending (with less blood spilled) could be possible would reassure a lot of Dems who are starting, as Maher said, to really freak out about this.
For Obama, directly pressuring Clinton to quit- or having his surrogates do so - has pretty much already proven to be a backfired strategy.
So instead, he should take a page from Hillary's playbook. When she had the opportunity to try and make him look weak and afraid to speak in detail about his ideas, she jumped at it and challenged him to more debates. She basically said, "Okay, if you really have solid positions and not just great speeches, then I'm calling you out - I'm going to make you back it up!"
He should take a similar approach in suggesting a happy ending to this fairly bitter fight, and instead of saying what she should do, say what he would do. I've seen Hillary supporters on CNN expressing confidence that she'll get a big enough win in Pennsylvania to turn the tide and win not only the popular vote but also the pledge delegate count by the end of the primary/caucus season. In those talking head debates, Obama should have a surrogate there to hint:
"Well, if either candidate wins both the popular vote and the pledged delegates, s/he should concede and withdraw from the race."
Obama should not be calling for Clinton to quit prematurely, but indicating that either candidate - including himself - should abide by the will of the voters after they've all had their say.
I guess there would be a risk of sounding like a loser, but for him to put his money where his mouth is and call for her to do the same seems to me to be a more high road approach than just having people call for her to drop out now.
It's a harder position for her to counter without looking like she's willing to dismiss the will of the people, and since the odds are so heavily in his favor at this point, it's a fairly low risk gamble.
If voting can destroy the Democratic Party, then the party isn't very democratic. Democrats need to stop freaking out about how this long primary battle by two popular candidates needs to be settled yesterday...
Democrats, your task is not just to choose between this pair, it's to grow a pair... What is so terrible about a long, drawn out contest?
The move by Obama surrogates to call for Hillary to drop out does seem like not only a miscalculation, but a fairly wimpy move. And Obama's quickness in saying she can stay in as long as she likes suggests he knew that sort of talk might rub a lot of people the wrong way (especially those Democratic voters who haven't had the opportunity to vote yet).
Still, the idea that the nominee should be decided upon before this battle ends up at the convention is a very reasonable one. And for either candidate to indicate an earlier ending (with less blood spilled) could be possible would reassure a lot of Dems who are starting, as Maher said, to really freak out about this.
For Obama, directly pressuring Clinton to quit- or having his surrogates do so - has pretty much already proven to be a backfired strategy.
So instead, he should take a page from Hillary's playbook. When she had the opportunity to try and make him look weak and afraid to speak in detail about his ideas, she jumped at it and challenged him to more debates. She basically said, "Okay, if you really have solid positions and not just great speeches, then I'm calling you out - I'm going to make you back it up!"
He should take a similar approach in suggesting a happy ending to this fairly bitter fight, and instead of saying what she should do, say what he would do. I've seen Hillary supporters on CNN expressing confidence that she'll get a big enough win in Pennsylvania to turn the tide and win not only the popular vote but also the pledge delegate count by the end of the primary/caucus season. In those talking head debates, Obama should have a surrogate there to hint:
"Well, if either candidate wins both the popular vote and the pledged delegates, s/he should concede and withdraw from the race."
Obama should not be calling for Clinton to quit prematurely, but indicating that either candidate - including himself - should abide by the will of the voters after they've all had their say.
I guess there would be a risk of sounding like a loser, but for him to put his money where his mouth is and call for her to do the same seems to me to be a more high road approach than just having people call for her to drop out now.
It's a harder position for her to counter without looking like she's willing to dismiss the will of the people, and since the odds are so heavily in his favor at this point, it's a fairly low risk gamble.
Advertisement





Obama's NOT calling for her to drop out. He's asked his surrogates to stop doing so. Saying he is calling for her to drop out is a Clinton talking point, not at all based in facts. --like most Clinton talking points.
April 7, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't disagree with you, but the perception is already out there that "his camp" did call for her to quit, since his surrogates did. Given that, if they want to keep the pressure on for things to come to a conclusion earlier rather than later (and everything would indicate that they do), all I'm suggesting is that by embracing a standard that would also apply to him if she actually were to pass him in the popular vote and pledged delegate count (which is not going to happen anyway) is a method of doing so that's more diplomatic and more appealing to those who haven't had the chance to vote yet.
April 7, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
The issue is not that Clinton is running when her odds are poor. The issue is that she had in the past given excellent talking points to McCain in his eventual race against (probably) Obama. Especially about being experienced or passing the CiC threshold, whatever that is. She herself did so at least four times, and the clips are on YouTube, forever.
Lately Clinton has toned down placing McCain above Obama in experience. That's fine. But I wish I would stop hearing that Clinton surrogates are telling superdelegates that Obama can't win. I know the official Clinton line is that Obama will have a harder time winning than Clinton, but that's not what's being reported with regard to the superdelegates.
I wish Hillary would be more like Mike. (Huckabee.)
April 7, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is all about the press picking up and spewing back whatever new convoluted spin the Clinton campaign decides is good for today. Of course Obama is not calling for her to drop out. (Although many who have done the math have reached this conclusion . . . gasp . . independently.) Creating each new comical, dizzying scenario Clinton paints for what is happening now in the "race," and getting it out there, is undoubtedly her biggest success.
April 7, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry... but if the roles were reserved, you can bet the Clinton campaign would have backed a moving truck up to their opponent's campaign headquarters and started the loading the truck up for them.
Team Obama has been more than tactful in this election. They have been tolerant of attacks and smears that many of us would have "killed" -- both the message and the messenger.
Clinton is losing -- has lost -- this race and staying in makes her blind and selfish ambition all the more desperate.
April 7, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
As I keep saying, she peed in our pool when she lied about his stance on NAFTA. The damage is done, I just hope it can be mitigated.
If she would stay positive and sell herself instead of wounding the party on a key issue in key states, I'd vote for her staying in as long as her ego requires.
April 7, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink