Thursday, 8 May 2008

Last October, a revelatory Vanity Fair article called "Going After Gore" traced the dubious history of the "toxic coverage" in the US media that irreparably damaged Gore's chances in the 2000 election. The effortless charm of George W Bush was relentlessly contrasted with Gore's inability to turn charm on like a tap.

Gore was seen as too focused on the minutiae of policy, and as someone who wasn't a natural politician, whose lack of ease with the press, and the public, was a liability in a campaign increasingly run on personality and on rhetoric. Bush was the man reporters wanted to have a beer with: a roguish, fun-loving guy who'd be "a different kind of Republican". Meanwhile, a journalist with Time magazine admitted: "It's really easy, and it's fun to disprove Al Gore." And so they went for him, setting him up and then shooting him down.

As the calls for Hillary Clinton, another "unnatural" politician and "charmless" policy wonk who has been excoriated by the press, to concede the primary race for the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama grow louder and more hectoring, it seems worth pausing to consider whether history might have anything to teach.

The most common reason put forward for insisting that Clinton "do the right thing" and "bow out graciously" is that she is doing the Democratic party, and its chances in November, irretrievable harm by prolonging the internecine struggle of the primary contest and taking it to the convention (despite the fact that the chairman of the National Democratic Committee, Howard Dean, has suggested that the nomination should be decided around 1 July).

A similar argument was advanced in 2000, pressuring Gore to concede the presidency to Bush, or risk a "constitutional crisis" – American code for "rip the country apart". He was told he couldn't win, that the people had spoken, that he should concede graciously and let the system work – the one the Republicans were busy rigging. So he conceded. That turned out well, didn't it?

Yes, the general election is different from the primaries. But far from being an especially protracted Democratic primary, this one is right on historical track. June is actually the magic month, in which the Democratic nomination was clinched in 1992 by Bill Clinton; in 1988 by Dukakis (Jesse Jackson didn't withdraw until June); in 1984 by Mondale (who didn't officially gain the nomination until the convention in July); in 1976 by Carter; and in 1972, the first year in which the present primary system operated, by McGovern. The only exception to the June rule was the 1980 election, in which Edward Kennedy fought on against Carter all the way until the convention in August. Only in the last two elections, in other words, has the Democratic nomination been a foregone conclusion this early in the primary process. And neither the results of 2000 or 2004 should send Democrats rushing to foreclose their options.

The other argument for Clinton 's summary withdrawal is that using superdelegates would somehow be cheating, subverting the democratic process by asking party mandarins to overrule the popular vote and, while they're at it, refuse the first viable African-American candidate his legitimate shot at the White House. But no one seems to have any compunction about insisting that the first woman with a legitimate chance withdraw from the race. And yes, the superdelegates are a legitimate route: the US primaries are not mini-national elections, they are much closer to the UK system of electing a party leader, who then seeks the popular vote in a general election.

Meanwhile, that much-vaunted primary "popular vote" that Clinton has lost doesn't take account of the Democrats or independents in Michigan or Florida, both of which will be swing states in November; or that only 60,000 popular votes separate Clinton and Obama if Michigan and Florida are counted; or that the superdelegate rule was created precisely in order to decide primary races in which there was no clear popular mandate. It is by no means definitionally sexist to call for Clinton to resign, but given how gingerly everyone is approaching the question of Obama's (mixed) race, it seems worth letting the country prove the point.

But the most important reason to cease pressuring Clinton to quit is that the media and the blogosphere, delighting in their sportive shredding of Gore's electoral chances in 2000, helped pave the way for the disastrous US administration of the last eight years. If the media enjoyed dismantling Gore, their pursuit of Clinton has been blood-sport. Let's allow history, and democracy, to play out their course – and stop creating self-fulfilling prophecies

My dad was out of the country and I phoned him last night. I told him that Obama had won and the news believe it's over.

My dad then asked me if Obama had captured the delegats. I said 'no' and that's why Hillary is pressing on but the news and the loser Democrats are telling her to stop.

My dad told me that this race has to go down to the wire, counting MI and FL.

So, in a nuthsell, Hillary is right! Keep the race going...

My dad is a former lawyer.. ;)

Not long after the polls close in the May 20 Kentucky and Oregon primaries, Barack Obama plans to declare victory in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

ADVERTISEMENT

And, until at least May 31 and perhaps longer, Hillary Clinton's campaign plans to dispute it

Obama just made fun of Hillary for saying she was going to obliterate Iran. Now, Obama is making the same mistake==> Declaring victory before a final count...

The last time someone did this, it was Bush in 2000.

Now, the entire nation and countless foreigners are absorbing a moment that had seemed decades away, if possible at all. Smart strategists and rank-and-file voters ponder how Obama rose so far so fast, and theories abound. Historians will sort it out someday, but Obama's blend of oratory, biography, optimism and cool confidence come to mind most immediately..

Really?? Look, Bush and Obama do not qualify to be President.

For seven years, Bush's weakness played out in the international scenes. We're feeling the damage.

If elected, for the next four years, Obama's weakness will play out in the international and domestic scenes. He'll be taking us on a 50-mph ride, trying to catch up to what it means to be President.

I was right when I wrote on this board and mentioned that Obama will probably be naive and make friends with enemies, only to wake up to our enemies, owning weapons of mass destruction. And he'll be shocked.

Life plays itself. His judgement caused him to befriend Rev Wright, only to wake up to a rude awakening of an extremist, pulling down his Presidency.

It may not affect him in the Democratic run, but in the general election, the only thing people are going to remember him is his association with Wright for 20 years. We dont know him, and we dont know of his accompishment, but we know of his judgement to stay with an extremist.

Remember the Christian Forum?

Obama is a Christian, but he stood up for the Muslim, Buddhism, and atheists. He embraced their religions. He, in fact, has violated God's first principle of Christianity "Thou shall have no other gods before me".

Let me preach to Obama about atheism. He is WRONG to accept or promote atheims. For 40 years, Mother Russia threw God out of the lives of their people. The people rotted spiritually. Gorbachov stood up for God and informed Mother Russia not to persecute people Christians. They are the very ones in society that are less corrupted and have a solid foundation to live their lives. Russia opened its door to God. The Gospel is being preached to their prisons. I watched a documentary on prisons in Russia. People are looking for leaders and they have realized that they have shut God for so many years, that their leaders or to-be leaders are in the prisons. The Gospel is being preached to men in the prisons.

It is wrong for him to promote atheism by embracing their viewpoints.

I understand Obama is trying to be a one-size fits all politician, but it's not realistic.

if McCain picks Huckabee, it's over for Obama. Huckabee will attract all the lower white middle class America. He's a Bill Clinton, but a Republican one.

I just watched Channel 11 and Pat Buchanan mentioned that McCain may pick Romney as his VP.

This is really sick news for me. A Mormon is not a Christian. Now, I will never vote for McCain. Obama, at least, is not a Mormon.

Dont say that I didnt warn you, but with Obama, he's going to be ready on his fourth year.

I'm disappointed with America. We elected Bush, and now we're repeating the same mistake, we're electing Obama.

We went from far right to far left. I cant wait for him to get to the White House and see him trip all over everything. I cant wait for the race issue to be the top agenda for the next four years. We're going to be bogged down with race everyday and we're going to be bogged down with the black and white issue all day, everyday.

This election has already showed a snapshot of the future. It'll be the same when Obama is in office.

If you say something against him, you're a racist. If you dont say anything, he'll take us in the wrong direction.

For those college kids that voted him, dont expect the economy to recover anytime soon. Obama will not be able to deliver. His candidacy is a Bush Part III, the softer side of not knowing what to do when you're a President.

Setting another record?

You can thank Obama for voting for the DickCheney, energy program. What a loser!!

Why do Democrats always elect wimps and Republicans, crooks?

About gays and lesbians, dont even talk about them.

Obma is for gays and lesbians. I"m sorry but it's a sin and God is against it.

Jesus ate and drank with sinners, but he also instructed them to stop sinning. Jesus came to save the lost, not inspire them to keep sinning.

I do not support Obma's viewpoint on this issue.

He is wrong ON Jeremy Wright
He is wrong on promoting atheims
He is wrong on abortion
He is wrong on promoting gays and lesbians
He is wrong on voting for Bush/Cheney energy policy

He's just lucky he has the backigns of the African community, othr than that, he's not qualified.

Hillary, sorry to what had happened to you.

Look, democrats, dont be stupid!

Angelic Obama needs a Dick Cheney type by his side to do the dirty work, he'll need Hillary as the VP.

Remember Bush? He wore a halo on his head, but it was Dick Cheney in the background, pressuring everyone to get their measures passed.

So, Obama and Hillary should thank each other for helping one another find their voices.

Obama sit around with a halo around his head forever! Trust me.

My brother and my father have both told me that they will vote for Senator McCain if Hillary doesnt win the nominee.

They believe that his service for his country, excels Obama's talents. I am shocked...