scott d. feldstein

“Hillary deserves to be Obama’s VP.”

There was a close primary election, but it doesn’t follow that she “deserves” anything, or that she’d be the best addition to the Obama ticket. She brings a certain Democratic demographic with her, but she also brings the ability to alienate swing voters. She also will unite the Republican party against us–something McCain can’t even do. Meanwhile there are other possibilities which serve to shore up Obama’s military/foreign policy experience, bring in states he’s weak in, cater to groups that he’s not currently reaching.

“If she’s not the VP candidate, I won’t vote for him!”

Sweet Jesus, you’re an asshole. You seriously mean to say that, as a big Clinton supporter, you find McCain more to your liking than Obama–a man whose policy positions are virtually indistinguishable from Clinton’s. That’s as logical as a snake’s armpit. On the other hand, you could just be doing it out of spite–and that’s where the asshole part comes in. Apparently you’d rather sacrifice the values that Clinton and the Democratic party stand for just so you can shake your bitter little fist at the sky and demand that your candidate can “get her due.” That’s petty and stupid.

“He said such nasty things about Clinton during the campaign.”

Tell me, what color is the sky on your planet? He said nasty things about her? Take off your ClintonVision goggles for a nanosecond and realize that the actual state of affairs is that she and her campaign were far more aggressive than he was–and that they said some pretty controversial stuff, too.

“He can’t win without her.”

Bullshit. He can probably win with her, but there are at least a couple of better choices which would help him win even bigger.

“Clinton is going to do everything she can to sabotage Obama.”

Come on, really? You really think that she’s going to do everything she can to cause the Democratic party to lose the white house in November? I’m sorry, friend, but you have bought into the Hillary-is-the-devil meme started by misogynists, Republicans and misogynistic Republicans. Wake up.

“She’s going to run as an independent.”

No chance in hell.

“Obama should pick Colin Powell as his running mate.”

Because it would resonate so well with his “I was against this war from the beginning” message to be running with the guy who spoke lies to the United Nations in order to sell it to the American people. And it would really work well to have a Bush administration official on the ticket even though Bush has the lowest approval rating in the history of approval ratings.

No. I don’t think so. Here’s the positives:

• It would bring in the much-talked-about (but possibly overrated) Hillary supporters who won’t vote for Obama.
• She’d make a great attack-dog running mate.
• There’s little difference between Clinton and Obama on matters of policy.

And here’s the negatives:

• She and her husband may upstage Obama.
• Some swing voters dislike her enough to drive them to McCain.
• She does the one thing McCain can’t do himself–unify and energize the Republican party.
• Her record on the war muddies Obama’s “I was always against this” line.
• She represents the Democratic establishment and is a true Washington insider. This doesn’t mesh well with Obama’s “Change” message.
• She’s a divisive figure in American politics and would likely bring some of that with her to an Obama presidency. Whitewater II, anyone? It’ll happen.

I’ll stick more or less to my earlier prediction: Obama’s VP pick will be Richardson by a nose–but I’d rather see Clark. Plus, he won’t make an announcement about it for at least another month, possibly two.

Here’s a fun game over at CNN.com. It’s a calculator in which you can adjust sliders corresponding to all six remaining Democratic primary contests as well as one for the remaining superdelegates. Play around with it. I did and I learned something stunning: if senator Clinton were to win every single remaining contest by 55-45 and also took superdelegates by a corresponding amount, Obama would still win. That’s how far be hind she is. One has to suspect that she’s remaining in the race primarily in case Obama self-destructs so badly that he literally has to withdraw from the race. She. Can’t. Win.

More than her refusal to admit this and drop out, what really bothers me is the media. For months on end we’ve all listened to pundits, analysts and other talking heads tell us that this unusually long primary race is terrible for the Democrats in November. We’ve heard endlessly that a “decisive” contest is just around the corner–and then after the results come in exactly as predicted, told yet again that the race will continue just as it did before. The worst, however, is the endless parade of media Jeremiads who seemingly never tire of wringing their hands over how damaging this all is to the Democratic party.

If I had to predict it, I’d say we’re in for a decisive Democratic win in November. And it’s not just because the Current Occupant–the most unpopular president in history–has an R after his name. It’s because the Democratic primary race has gone on so long.

One of the things you often hear said is that the unusually long contest is causing these candidate to spend lots of money that they would otherwise use to beat McSame in November. I guess this is true, as far as it goes, but I don’t think anybody is actually predicting that the Democrat is going to be outspent. So if it’s universally accepted that we’re going to raise and spend more money than they are in spite of the way the primary has occurred, why the worrying?

Another thing you often hear these doomsayers telling you is that Democrats are so gosh-darned divided that no matter who wins a significant number of them will stay home or even cross party lines in November. I think Democrats will unite quite nicely behind senator Obama. But more than that, Democratic primary races have seen record turnout and record voter registrations. For the first time in who knows how long Democrats other than ones who live in Iowa or New Hampshire actually got to participate in this decision! And it’s all happening precisely because of the long primary campaign season.

Finally, a note to Clinton supporters. First, your candidate cannot win the primary election. Second, I’m not sure why you’ve been supporting her in recent months, as she’s clearly the weaker of the two come November. As I’ve said before, senator Clinton can do the one thing that John McCain cannot: unite the Republican party. The reasons for this are many and varied–and some of them are frankly unfair and rooted in sexism–but the fact still remains.

Prediction: Clinton stays in the race until the nominee is won. That will happen at least by mid-June. All of the primary contests will be over and superdelegates will have nothing more to wait for or hide behind. The majority of them will go for Obama, making him the nominee.

And that is her best case scenario at this point. Other than Obama being found in bed with a dead teenage boy–and Osama bin Laden.

Obama won Texas.

Dear Texas Democratic primary voters:

So your primary is coming up on March 4th! Exciting! I guess you have a few things to think carefully about between now and then. Like who to vote for. Maybe I can help. Consider the following multiple choice question.

Republicans seem to be nominating a man who can’t even unite the base of his own party. A good strategy for Democratic victory in November would be:

a) Nominate a Democrat who will unite the base of the Republican party for them.

b) Nominate a Democrat who has the genuine potential to increase turnout among young and African-American voters.

c) It depends. I’m studying the fine print of the candidate’s policy statements on (fill in the blank) before I decide.

If you chose answer A then I guess you’re going to vote for senator Clinton. We’ll have a nominee who is divisive, who viscerally turns off even some in her own party, and who will most assuredly motivate tons of Republican voters against her in November.

if you chose answer C then I think I need to issue you a friendly wake-up call. The policy differences between Obama and Clinton are pretty small. There are differences, sure. In fact, I marginally like Clinton’s health care proposals better than Obamas. But I wouldn’t dream of letting that jeopardize a democratic win in November–and neither should you.

If you chose option B then you’re voting for senator Obama, which is exactly how I advise you to vote.

Listen, Texas, I’m glad we had this little chat. We don’t talk enough these days! Let’s get together for coffee or something. You still have my number, right? Cool. Talk to you later!

Scott

PS. Conventional wisdom has it that f Clinton doesn’t win Ohio and Texas on March 4th, her campaign is pretty much finished. Right now Ohio seems like a fairly solid Clinton win, so it’s up to you. Vote Obama, baby!

PPS. Yes, yes! I know that most of the hatred aimed at senator Clinton alluded to in answer A is undeserved and unfair–even sexist. But that doesn’t change the fact that it exists. Think about that please.

Winner:

“I think I will be the most Democrat who is most effective against a John McCain–or any other Republican, because [...] I will offer a clear contrast as somebody who never supported this war, thought it was a bad idea. I don’t want to just end the war, but I want to end the mind-set that got us into war in the first place. That’s the kind of leadership I intend to provide as president of the United states.” – Sen. Barack Obama

Loser:

“So what I hear you saying –and correct me if I’m wrong–is that you were naive in trusting president Bush?” – CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer to Sen. Hillary Clinton