Last Legs?
I generally agree with this post from the Great and Powerful Kos; although, even assuming she carries Ohio and Texas, the Clinton campaign has some serious image problems that could dog her in the fall, namely the image that Obama is running circles around her, that she's the past and he's the future, etc. etc. It looks as though an endorsement by John Edwards is imminent, and that should help some; if nothing else it could reassure nervous superdelegates and party bosses. Not sure I agree with Paul Krugman that Obamania is approaching Kim Jong Il levels of personality cultism, nor do I think this primary battle is really as nasty (from a historical perspective) as he suggests, given the large numbers of Democrats who say they'd be happy with either nominee. Bottom line? Democrats need to get a candidate, and fast. The wind may be at our backs, but McCain is no pushover and I would be astonished if the Right Wing Howler Monkey Media Chorus doesn't rev itself up to full volume against whoever ends up leading the party into battle.
Labels: 2008, Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John McCain, President, RWHMMC
posted by The Local Crank | 10:13 PM
7 Comments:
Not that an Edwards endorsement will really amount to much, but it certainly makes me wonder how serious or sincere he really was this whole race in casting himself (and even Obama, at times) as "agents of change," and Hillary as an agent of the status quo. I suspect he's either angling for a position in a Clinton White House or is just petulantly upset about Obama enjoying the success he's desperately sought for the past 5 years or so.
Actually, it occurs to me that a far likelier explanation for an Edwards endorsement is that he simply wants to endorse the candidate he deems more likely to lose to McCain, hoping it will give him another shot to be the nominee in 2012.
If you see the NY Times today, there's an article about how the Clinton campaign is regarding Texas and Ohio as must-wins. I don't know her numbers in Ohio, but she's got a lot of support in Texas. So I don't know if it's possible for Obama to land a knock-out blow by winning both but, if he were to, does that mean Clinton's done? I still think either Obama or Clinton will trounce McCain in the fall, but I am made more uncomfortable by the fact that McCain gets a head start on his general election campaign. The sooner the primary is over for Democrats, the better.
I think Edwards is enough of a grown-up that he is motivated by enlightened self-interest, not mere pique. It's in his interest that a Democrat win, preferably one who wins in such a way as to owe him something. I agree with Xanthippas that the sooner the Democrats settle on a candidate the better. Otherwise, they run the risk that McCain will define the terms of the debate before it even starts.
It's definitely still the Democrats' election to lose this year, without or without a protracted battle between Clinton and Obama, but the GOP at least gave themselves (albeit reluctantly) a fighting chance with McCain. He's far from perfect, but as I've said before and truly believe, he's a better candidate than they deserve.
And as I have often said, never underestimate the ability of the Democratic Party to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory...
Quite true.
Post a Comment
<< Home