Digby was one of the very first blogs I ever started reading on the interwoobs – incisive, intelligent, observant and often darkly funny. So it’s unfortunate that I have to point out that her recent post is, unfortunately, mostly wrong.
I think the thing that has most exacerbated the fervent Clinton supporters’ frustration, and frankly astonished me a bit, has been this endless drumbeat since February for her to drop out even though she was still winning primaries. Nobody should expect a politician who is still winning to quit. It makes no sense. It’s not in their DNA. Certainly, in a race this close it made no sense whatsoever. I don’t think that line has helped Obama (and I think it’s why the campaign itself has been so careful not to publicly flog it.)
In 84 and 88, Jackson was seen as a potential party wrecker too and in 88 he took his historic campaign, in which he won 11 contests, all the way to the convention. He made a very famous speech which he ended with the chant “Keep Hope Alive,” which could have easily been construed as wishing for Dukakis to fail so he could get another bite at the apple (something that people are accusing Clinton of already.) But it wasn’t.
This is a terrible comparison, because nobody has simply been complaining about Clinton campaigning per se. Most Obama supporters will agree right off the bat that Clinton had every right to waste a shitload of money trying to get a nomination that, after the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4th, would be nearly mathematically impossible to get. Hey, Hillary Clinton is fucking rich. If she wants to personally rejuvenate the economy by stimulating it directly, more power to her.
The problem Obama supporters have – and it’s entirely valid – is that Clinton’s campaign, by its own admission and design, went negative.
In 1988, Jesse Jackson gave a speech about keeping hope alive. What he didn’t do was suggest that Michael Dukakis was disenfranchising voters. He didn’t suggest – repeatedly – that Michael Dukakis was an inferior candidate to George H.W. Bush. He didn’t compare the American electoral system to a third-world nation, didn’t repeatedly question Dukakis’ patriotism, didn’t subtly suggest that hey he couldn’t be sure that Dukakis wasn’t a Muslim, didn’t allow his campaigners to suggest that Dukakis was only winning because he was white, didn’t try to portray Dukakis as an out-of-touch elitist, didn’t accuse the Dukakis campaign of engaging in active racism in the face of all available evidence otherwise.
The reason people have called upon Clinton to drop out for the good of the party and the election isn’t because she merely chose to continue campaigning. It’s because her tactics were, intentionally or not, poisoning the well. Her campaign and she herself personally have aided and abetted any number of right-wing framing jobs on Obama.
And that’s why comparing Hillary Clinton to Jackson in 1988 or John Edwards in 2004 or any other number of candidates who stayed in the race long after it became evident they weren’t going to win is a false equivalency. Those individuals put party before their own self-interest. Hillary Clinton did not.
Related Articles
17 users responded in this post
:p I don’t see anyone comparing Mike Huckabee with Hillary Clinton. He technically stayed in the race until McCain collected the majority of delegates, even those his coverage dropped to nill after Super Tuesday.
Why? Because while Huckabee says random crazy shit every now and again, he’s not saying that random crazy shit in an attempt to tear down McCain’s Presidential run. The GOP adherence to the 11th Commandment has to be their one remaining virtue. Once primary season ended, the kid gloves went back on and everyone was hugs and kisses.
I wish I could say Hillary will be sheathing the long knives after this primary season is over. But, at this rate, its NEVER GOING TO END! So I’ll just be content to cry myself to sleep every night instead.
I was JUST SAYING almost this exact same thing this morning. If she’d been running a clean campaign, intent on continuing to keep focus on issues that were important to her (including, potentially, screwy elements of the Democractic primary process), and had refrained from any of the negative stuff that’s going to hurt us so badly in November, I wouldn’t have a problem with her campaigning as long as she wanted.
And, of course, the ironic thing is that if she hadn’t ever gone negative, there might not be as much of asn issue, because without it she just might have been WINNING.
What makes me so sad about all of this is that I started this election season feeling hopeful and excited. And now I’m feeling dread and fear of an extension of all of the crap we’ve been going through for the past eight years. I’m not ready for the utter lack of hope.
Which is strange, because over the last 8 years, we’ve all had plenty of practice.
Three posts the day after you said you wouldn’t post much this week. Nice.
Well, two were in the hopper well in advance because I prepare stuff on the weekends. And then I was doing work on something else and saw Digby’s post and had to say something.
Forget Jackson. At this point, Clinton’s being substantially more obnoxious than Brown was in ’92.
I think at this point Hillary would prefer that McCain win in November. That way she can run again in 4 years rather then waiting 8. Yeah, she’s that self-centered. 😛
Dang it, that tounge-stick-out smiley looks too happy, not what I was going for…
*shakes head*
The only good that will come out of this is that the Obama campaign will be prepared for what the McCain campaign will try to do. It can’t be worse than what the Clinton campaign has already done.
I think at this point Hillary would prefer that McCain win in November. That way she can run again in 4 years rather then waiting 8. Yeah, she’s that self-centered
I just can’t see Hillary getting the nomination in 2012 after the way she’s run this campaign. If Obama loses there will be a significant number of folks who lay the loss at Hillary’s feet and I just can’t see that being a hole she manages to climb out of in four years.
And, as a poster over at another blog notes “Do these people even realize that forcing an Obama loss is the easiest way to make sure a white woman won’t be nominated for a god 20 or 30 years? People aren’t going to roll the dice on a woman if a black man just lost. Not for a good, long time. It’ll be White Southern Men for the rest of our lives if Obama loses”
Obama’s prepared for half-truths and and implied lies, but what about the flat-out loud and proud lies the Swift-boating organizations will pull? 😉
Also, Clinton knows that in four years’ time, the public will have largely forgotten everything. After all, this time around, they barely remembered that when she was First Lady and when she was first running for the Senate, she was widely seen as being as or even more polarizing than George W. is (to put it politely, and even here in Illinois, where she grew up), and thus has less chance than Al Gore & John Kerry had of getting more than 49% of the electoral votes. (After all, as Top Gear proved, simply painting “Hillary for President” on the side of a car is enough to get someone run out of town on a rail or worse in some areas of the country.)
I don’t think Hillary will run again in four years, because she’ll be up for re-election in the Senate then, and I doubt that’d be an easy campaign. She’ll dig in, keep her seat, and run in 2012.
John: But… 2012 is IN four years.
“He didn’t compare the American electoral system to a third-world nation.”
Well, it sort of is, isn’t it?
in defense of digby, before this somehow comes off as her telling supporters to come over here and bash you, (if that occurs. i was early on the defense of kurtz, but that was because i still like his stuff. anyway, moot point.) right now (i think) all the (legitimate, non hillary) blogs realize that obama is our boy (and i like that a lot). blah blah blah unite the party blah blah blah.
you have a very valid point, yes, and not to diminish what youre saying, but digby is more read in the political agenda than you are. (i believe, once again, and point out my flaws if theyre there) if she was to say something along the lines of hillary is a mean jerk who should shut the hell up (and in my view, fire terry mcaulliffe) shes gonna catch a lot of flack for it from the rest of the webosphere. and the hillary commentors.
also, dude, youre kinda leaving out the part before and after these paragraphs, where she points out that women and blacks are the backbone of the party, and you cant disenfranchise that. she also points out that neither side is happy with the other candidate, and “to think that a race this close could end with an instantaneous round of kumbaaya among the loser’s most passionate supporters is probably a little naive,” which is the nice way of saying “shit has been said by both sides, yeah it sucks.”
granted, i feel that the stuff HRC said was worse than what barack said. dont get me wrong about that. but the thing is that the media has painted this race as women versus blacks, and thats what has to be dealt with first. you need to make sure not to piss off the women voters who see this as their only chance to have power, while still keeping the black voters who see this as THEIR only chance for power.
and while it is entirely correct to say HRC has been a terrible person who really should just shut the fuck up, digby cant say that without forcing some white women to say “fuck it, im voting mccain. i dont need those reproductive rights anyway.”
then again, maybe im just another privileged “white male, aged 18-45. everyone listens to my ideas, no matter how crazy they are.” now, on to some nuts and gum.
I agree with all of what you’re saying, but I don’t think it’s particularly relevant anymore. The thing’s over, and Clinton lost. For this election to turn out well, the party needs to unify. You don’t get that by saying unify now, assholes to Clinton supporters. They have to feel welcome in the Obama campaign, and they have to stop seeing Obama supporters as their enemy. We have to let this shit go.
–d
Er, 2016, sorry. Typo. Hillary will spend 2012 shoring up her Senate seat and run for Pres again in 2016. (Unless she decides to stake it all on a do-or-die attempt at the Presidency or no office at all, but that hasn’t tended to work out well. I think. IIRC.)