Hillary Drops Out: Nothing to Lose, Everything to Gain

Most pundits and statisticians agree that Hillary Clinton’s chances of being the Democratic nominee for President are slim to none. In fact, if the positions were reversed and Barack Obama was where Hillary is now, he most certainly would have thrown in the towel.

As I look at the situation I see nothing but upside to Hillary’s departure from this race. Polls have shown that most Hillary supporters would vote for Obama if he were the nominee. So, while her base would be disappointed, they would not likely sit out the November election. So there is little to lose by her dropping out.

If she dropped out, she would be the hero of the Democratic party. She would clear the way for the most dynamic candidate of the past 45 years to take on John McCain. She would demonstrate her commitment to the future of our country and she would lay to rest the suspicion that she would prefer McCain to win over Obama. She would cement her place in the Senate as a force to be reckoned with. She would totally disarm her opponents who consider her a selfish calculating politician.

If she stays in, she risks wrecking the Democratic party, particularly if the superdelegates award her the nomination. If nominated against the will of the people, Hillary will lose most if not all of the African-American vote and McCain will be the next President. If the superdelegates uphold the verdict of the primary/caucus voters, then Obama will emerge from the convention severely beaten up by his own fellow Democrat and the delay in his selection will give McCain a huge head of steam toward a November victory.

In short, by dropping out, Hillary has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

Why Hillary Cannot be Nominated: Judgement

Senator Barack Obama has made much of Senator Hillary Clinton’s vote to empower George Bush to go to war with Iraq and quite frankly, while I love Barack, the argument is getting old. Yes, it was the wrong vote. But it is the past. How about the present?

Hillary has made a statement in the present that proves beyond all doubt that she does not have the judgement  to be President of the United States of America. On more than one occasion Hillary has stated that the Florida and Michigan primary votes should stand as is. One might argue about Florida. While it was a beauty contest, neither side campaigned and both sides were represented on the ballot.  So one could argue the contest was “fair”. There is of course the factor that some folks may not have voted because they knew there would be no delegates seated but that not withstanding there was still record turnout for the vote in Florida.

Michigan on the other hand is entirely different. Barack was not on the ballot in Michigan. How can Hillary possibly say with a straight face that she beat someone who was not even on the ballot? Indeed, if she had run unopposed in all the other contests across the country, she could claim victories everywhere. It is totally absurd.

So fundamentally, Hillary saying that she “won” Michigan is equivalent to George Bush saying that Iraq was responsible for 9/11.  Senator Clinton has proven that she will say anything, however nonsensical, to achieve her ends. Why do we believe that once President she will not continue to manipulate the American people to fulfill her own agenda?

Was “24″ Prescient? (Part 2)

Several weeks ago I blogged on the notion that the TV series “24″ may have made Barack Obama a more acceptable candidate by acclimating America to President David Palmer, a character played by actor Dennis Haysbert. (I might note that my blog entry appeared several weeks before TV Guide offered the same analysis. You heard it here first folks!)

After deeper consideration, sadly, I have to revise my view. In “24″ race was never mentioned. The only reason we knew Palmer was African-American was by looking at him. No one ever brought up racial issues with him. He never self-identified. It was treated as a simple matter of fact. In that way, “24″ was not prescient. The Obama/Clinton contest is immersed in race. On every primary and caucus night we analyze for whom whites voted and for whom blacks voted. We project what the black community will do should Obama not get the nomination. We obsess on his name and what garb he is wearing in various photographs.

I once thought that Barack’s success reflected that America was at last transcending race. We had finally put it aside. But the truth is that only a deeply racist country could spend as much time focusing on race in this campaign as we have.

Respectfully,
Rutherford