Glad That Obama Ran - Hillary Will Win The Nomination

Median Democrat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Apr-28-08 11:06 PM
Original message

Glad That Obama Ran - Hillary Will Win The Nomination

This post should upset both Clinton and Obama supports, since this may be hard to believe, but I still am undecided between the two candidates.

Hillary appeals to my realistic, cynical side. While Obama appeals to the side of me that would like to believe that campaigns can still be won with grass roots support, and without appeal to wedge issues designed to turn segments of the population against each other.

Hillary is a fighter. She is a ruthless fighter, who will do what it takes to win the Presidency. Her campaign will win, not because she rallied people to some great vision of hers, but because she managed to marginalize Obama into the black candidate who most working class whites will not support. Yes, there are a lot of white people who would never vote for a black man. However, Hillary very effectively got a lot of voters to vote against Obama on the theory that they should not vote for a black man (even if they may agree with him) because some other third party would never vote for him. Obama's "electability" became a code word for America is just not ready for a black president, as many voters in PA were quoted as saying in polls. Thus, it became okay to use race, not because you are personally racist, but your neighbor is.

To Hillary's credit, she recognized this, and capitalized on it. Hillary will win the nomination, not because people love her, but because they now fear the black, elitist, inexperienced candidate. Is it effective? Yes. Is it inspiring? Hardly. However, there is a side of me that would love to see Hillary run a Karl Rove campaign against John McCain, and to Hillary's credit, she does not suggest that she will not run a negative campaign. She makes no apologies. Indeed, this is part of her fighter persona. So, in the end, I do think that Hillary can beat McCain, because Hillary can effectively use fear. Now, I would love to say that this tactic will not work, however, as the past 8 years under Bush, and the end of the primary season approaches, fear works. Negative campaigning works, and no amount of idealistic denials will prove otherwise.

Hillary did not invent racism. She did use it. Effectively. And, would we rather be idealistic losers, or winning pragmatists?

I loved Barrack Obama's message and theme. It was hopeful. His campaign really did not dwell on the negative attacks. He could have run 24/7 attack ads featuring Marc Rich, Bill Clinton's role in securing drilling rights in Kazakistan, and highlighted Hillary's role in passively supporting "bankruptcy reform," which benefitted the lending institutions in her state. Yes, there were some negative advetising, but Obama's campaign was more about him, then being the anything but Hillary campaign. The problem is that these kind of campaigns don't work anymore. With Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting, networks now take an active role in pushing specific agendas. Remember Stolen Honor, the network smear of John Kerry by ABC affiliates? The fact of the matter is that you do need the support of corporations, which in turn sponsor the networks, which in turn feed into the pundits that tell millions of Americans what to think. Thus, millions of Americans made snap decisions based on Reverand Wright without listening to the full sermons, or Obama's speech on the matter. Obama had a wonderful gift for oratory, and he inspired people. Sadly, this very gift was ridiculed, and he became derided as an elitist.

The sad fact that I knew was that campaigns are not won in the hearts and minds of the American people, but rather by appealing to the more basic prejudices and fears of Americans. 3 a.m. ads. Images of angry black men. White voters saying that America is not ready for a black president. This is the America that Karl Rove thrived in, and he was very effective. I hoped otherwise, but it was an empty promise.

In the end, Barrack could have sold out to a much greater extent than he did. Some folks will say that he has, but he didn't completely. He tried to walk the tight rope as a minority who was sensitive to the needs of both whites and minorities. I listened to his post-Wright speech, and it was absolutely true, which is why it ultimately doomed him. Many white Americans see racism as a thing of the past while they at the same time say that America is not ready for a black president. Yet, they don't understand why some minorities are angry at their disenfranchisement. Obama also told the minority Americans that the fears and racial resements of white Americans were based on legitimate concerns about their economic being, which were expressed as racism. Obama could have triangulated by denouncing his heritage and his community knowing that they would have to vote for him in the end, but he didn't.

So, I see Hillary winning, because she has indeed proven that Obama is unelectable. I can't really begrudge her this, because the GOP would likely have run this same campaign against Obama. It is just unfortunate that the Democratic Party has in the end proven that it's differences are one of degree, not substance. Afterall, Hillary did vote to give Bush authority to invade Iraq. It was a vote that was classic Hillary. Calculating, and driven by political reality, rather than actual conviction.

In the end, the President the U.S. elects is the President the U.S. deserves. That is the beauty of democracy.