Three Myths About the Democratic Race

Three Myths About the Democratic Race
Originally posted at BlogHillary by Peter Daou; reprinted in full below with permission

MYTH: Barack Obama is running a positive campaign that will unite Americans.

FACT: Barack Obama and his advisers have conducted a divisive “full
assault” on Hillary’s character.

While talking a lot about the politics of hope, change and unity, Sen. Obama
and his campaign have been conducting a relentless and singularly personal assault
on Hillary’s character. They have blanketed big states with false negative mailers
and radio ads and have described Hillary and her campaign as “disingenuous,”
“divisive,”
“untruthful,”
“dishonest,”
“polarizing,”
“calculating,”
“saying
whatever it takes to win,” “attempting
to deceive the American people,” “one
of the most secretive in America,” “deliberately
misleading,” “literally
willing to do anything to win,” and “playing
politics with war.”

This “full
assault” on Hillary’s integrity and character has reached a new peak
since Hillary’s victories on March 4th. One of Sen. Obama’s top surrogates equated
President Clinton with Joe McCarthy; another called Hillary a “monster;”
and his campaign
manager held an angry conference call (audio) claiming that Hillary
is “deeply flawed” and has “character issues.” That’s neither
unifying nor hopeful. If Sen. Obama really is the prohibitive favorite some
say he is, these negative attacks make absolutely no sense. Why would a frontrunner
seek to attack and divide? If Sen. Obama can’t unify Democrats in a
primary, how can he unify Americans in a general election?

=====

MYTH: The delegate “math” works decisively against Hillary.

FACT: The delegate math reflects an extremely close race that either
candidate can win.

“The Math” is actually very simple: with hundreds of delegates still
uncommitted, NEITHER candidate has reached the number of delegates required
to secure the nomination. And EITHER candidate can reach the required number
in the coming weeks and months. That is indisputable. No amount of editorials,
articles, blog posts, charts, graphs, calculations, formulas, or projections
will change the basic fact that either candidate can win. Pundits
who confidently proclaim that Hillary has no hope of winning because of “the
math,” have counted Hillary out of this race three times before. Each time
they based their sober assessments on ‘facts’ and ‘realities’ — and each time
they were wrong.

In a campaign with dozens of unexpected twists and turns, bold prognostications
should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. Look no further than Sen.
Obama’s “full assault” on Hillary’s character to judge whether he
thinks this election is over. The fact is this: Hillary and Sen. Obama are locked
in a very close, hard-fought campaign and Hillary is demonstrating precisely
the strength of character required of a president. Her resilience in the face
of adversity, her faith in the voters, her capacity to rise to every challenge,
are part of the reason she is the best general election candidate for Democrats.
And it is why she is increasingly strong against John McCain in the polls at
the same time that Sen. Obama is dropping against Sen. McCain.

=====

MYTH: For Hillary to win, super delegates must “overturn the will
of the people.”

FACT: The race is virtually tied, the “will of the people”
is split, and both candidates need super delegates to win.

The Obama campaign and Sen. Obama’s surrogates have engaged in a sustained
public relations effort to convince people that the election is over and that
if super delegates perform their established role of choosing a candidate who
they believe will make the best nominee and president, they are somehow “overturning
the will of the people.” They have the audacity to make this argument while
quietly and systematically courting those very same super delegates. They are
courting them because they know that Sen. Obama needs super delegates to win.
The Obama spin is being parroted daily by pundits, but it is patently false.
The race is virtually tied; the “will of the people” is split. By
virtually every measure, Hillary and Sen. Obama are neck and neck — separated
by less than 130 of the more than 3,100 delegates committed thus far and less
than 1% of the 27 million+ votes cast, including Florida and Michigan. Less
than 1%.

An incremental advantage for one candidate or the other is hardly a reason
for super delegates to change the rules mid-game. Despite the Obama campaign’s
aggressive spin and pressure, the RULES require super delegates to exercise
their best independent judgment, and that is what they will do. Even Sen. Obama’s
top strategist agrees they should. If not, then why don’t prominent Obama
endorsers like Senators Kerry (MA) and Kennedy (MA), and Governors Patrick (MA),
Napolitano (AZ) and Richardson (NM) follow the will of their constituents and
switch their support to Hillary? After all, she won their states. And if this
is truly about the “will of the people,” then Sen. Obama’s short-sighted
tactic to run out the clock on a revote in Florida and Michigan accomplishes
exactly two things: it disenfranchises Florida and Michigan’s voters; and it
hurts Democrats in a general election. Apparently, for the Obama campaign, the
“will of the people” is just words.