Politics with a side of Snark

Jackson and other nuts

When I was young and idealistic, I served on the county steering committee for the Jackson presidential campaign. Even then, however, I didn’t support Jackson because of Jackson but because of the progressive movement that had surrounded his campaign and was carrying it forward.

I was deeply offended when Jackson, in an unguarded moment, referred to New York as “hymietown.” His antisemintism was inexcusable.

But then, when he spoke at the convention, he won my heart again as he described the quilt that made up the American dream. He said, if I recall properly, that women were right when they said that they deserved equal pay for equal work. And that gay men and lesbians were right when they said they deserved to be able to live and love in peace and dignity. And workers were right when they said that their right to bargain collectively should be respected and protected. Each of these was a piece of the patchwork quilt that made up the American dream. But each was only a piece and none of them had a piece that was big enough to cover us and keep us warm. So we have to stitch together the pieces with a desire for justice and a willingness to stand up for one another. That thread would, if we let it, transform our pieces of fabric from small patches into a quilt that would cover everyone.

It was beautiful stuff.

And that is the pattern of Jesse Jackson. He is a mixture of the most base material (he admits to having a child out of wedlock during the 90s) and the most precious (consistently progressive and willing to put his body on the line). He is a tragically flawed figure.

If you had to pick a Shakespearean character to represent Jackson, his recent vile whisperings might lead you to Iago who also claimed to endorse and support Othello while whispering evil to the listening audience. But the truth is, I suspect, that Jackson is more like King Lear ranting about how ungrateful the next generation is and how they refuse to show their love through flattering speech.

I suspect Obama is secretly pleased over this latest flap. It has brought to the attention of the electorate that he isn’t afraid to be critical of African Americans and that he isn’t Jesse Jackson who, let’s face facts, hasn’t exactly won hearts and minds in the battleground states. By graciously accepting Jackson’s apology, Obama has floated above the controversy and made it clear to everyone that he is a statesman.

I think, however, that Jackson is done. Even his own son has repudiated his comments publically. “How sharper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless child.”

Just a few highlights of McSame’s history

McCain Votes to Filibuster Minimum Wage Hike

McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

Bush, McCain plug Social Security

McCain blasts Obama’s and Clinton’s attacks on NAFTA

McCain in NH: Would Be “Fine” To Keep Troops in Iraq for “A Hundred Years”

McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion

Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition

McCain says overturn the law that legalized abortion

McCain Defends Bush’s Iraq Strategy

With thanks to: Loaded Orygun

When your “last, best” just isn’t good enough…

Hillary recent wrote to the remaining uncommitted “automatic delegates,” making her case for them to support her effort to be the nominee of the party. The letter and memo reveal a great deal about the view from inside Hillaryland. Let’s take a look at her arguments for choosing her as the Democratic nominee and see what they show.

I. Hillary Clinton Will Lead in the Popular Vote for the Democratic Nomination

Not even close to true in any meaningful sense. You see, the way this number is concocted is so convoluted that it is, frankly, kind of embarrassing that a presidential candidate would resort to using it. In order for Hillary to have the lead in the popular vote, you have to include the out-of-order election in Florida and the Soviet-style one-name-only election in Michigan. Then you have to exclude the results of four other states that conduct caucuses and then do not release official numbers for candidates — just the resulting delegate spilts. Each of these states went for Obama.

Even if you count the results of Florida and then toss in, at full value, the very suspect results of Michigan (is it an election if your opponent isn’t even on the ballot?), you have to exclude those caucus states in order for Hillary to pull ahead. Otherwise, Obama remains ahead by something like 85,000 votes.

II. Hillary has put Together a Winning Coalition of Democratic Primary Voters.

Really? To my way of thinking, the single most important characteristic of a winning coalition is that it wins.

A continuing problem that the Clinton camp has is trying to argue the general election metrics based on the primary election exit polling. This is kind of like predicting what will happen in the Super Bowl based on the results of the World Series. The coalition that Clinton references (Lantios, seniors, women and the working-class) is basically the Democratic base. A non-trivial portion of those voters are going to pull the ‘D’ lever in the end regardless of the person at the head of the ticket.

Obama’s coalition of new voters, independents, progressives, and digusted Republicans is somewhat more interesting because it isn’t the usual suspects for the Democratic party.

If it were the case that all those who vote Clinton in the primary would vote McCain in the General if Obama is the nominee, I would agree with Clinton on this point. As it is, it is at best a fatuous argument and at worst an intentionally deceptive one.

III. Hillary Clinton Has Brought More New Voters into the Process than any Other Candidate

On this one, I simply call bullshit. 

It is true that more people have been registered as Democrats during this primary season than any other. But every available objective and subjective indicator shows this to be as a result of the unique qualities of the Obama campaign. The “newly registered” and “new democrat” votes have pretty consistently broken for Obama.

So, the Hillary argument becomes that more people have voted — period — this season than ever before. That’s true. Late primaries have been unexpectedly meaningful and people have voted in them because it made a difference. But this isn’t really about Hillary — unless she wants credit for being blind to the facts that have been pretty obvious since Super Tuesday. It’s more about the fact that the DNC designed a primary process that doesn’t make it easy to get a quick win when the field narrows to two candidates.

IV. The road to Pennsylvania Avenue goes through Ohio and Florida – Hillary is winning those states.

Well, this one is sort of true. If you are fighting the last two elections, they did indeed come down to Florida and Ohio. However, if you are looking at this election, it appears that Florida and Ohio aren’t as key. Obama appears to have widened the Democratic map, bringing in states like Colorado that otherwise flow Republican. 

More important, however, is the fact that Hillary has such high negatives. She is seen as untrustworthy by more people than not. She has baggage. And if the primary suggests anything, it is that overtime she loses ground whereas Obama tends to gain ground — slowly, but steadily, as time goes on.

And, again, you have to assume that current polls will, in fact, be the end result in November for this to hold true. You have to believe that nothing McCain or Obama does will matter once Hillary leaves the field.

The current electoral map shows Hillary has a clear path to victory and is leading Senator McCain in electoral votes.

True.

Also true? Obama is also beating McCain. And Obama’s measure of victory has been growing as the American people get to know him. And Hillary? Well, her margin has been slowly shrinking as her… issues become more obvious.

In fact, Obama puts more states into play than Hillary, a fact that will help “down ticket” Democrats.

In summary, the case Hillary makes is dishonest, deceptive, and mostly untrue. But then, have we come to expect anything else?

Hillary: it’s over. Honest.

Lately, Hillary has been comparing her epic battle to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations “as is” at the Democratic National Convention to the efforts by the Democratic party to extend the franchise to all Americans. The struggle for civil rights, the fight for women’s suffrage, and Hillary’s lone stand for the voters of FL and MI, we are to believe, are on a par.

There is, however, a problem with this narrative. You see, FL and MI both broke the rules established prior to the election by the Democratic National Committee. Now, it is true that the voters of FL and MI were not directly responsible. But their elected leaders were. And as we all know, like it or not, we voters are often held accountable for the actions of the elected leadership regardless of our personal support of their official behavior.

What’s more, attempting to count MI “as is” is even more anti-democratic (note small ‘d’) than excluding their delegation. Obama, and most other major candidates, removed their name from the ballot, leaving only Hillary to be elected in a Soviet-style “one name, one vote” election.

Neither Obama nor Hillary campaigned in FL or MI as they did in other states. And we have seen that campaigning does indeed affect voting. It might be that Hillary would have won either FL or MI. It could well be that Obamamania would have carried the day in one or both states. The point is that the voters didn’t get a chance to see the candidates and take them out for the proverbial test spin.

Hillary agreed to run for the Democratic nomination.

When she entered the race, she knew there would be caucus states. No state suddenly became a caucus state when she wasn’t looking.

When she entered the race, she knew that states that scheduled their primaries too early might be penalized or excluded. Many of her supporters were on the committee that drafted the rules in regard to this issue.

As she ran for the nomination, she said it was “clear” that MI’s primary would not be counted.

As she ran for the nomination, she signed a pledge not to campaign in FL or MI — a step not required by the Democratic National Committee but an idea cooked up in Iowa and New Hampshire as a sort of “loyalty test” to their place in the process. She signed that pledge to curry favor in Iowa and New Hampshire (so did everyone else) and she benefited from that pledge.

Now, when times are rough and it is clear that her only route to victory is to get FL and MI seated “as is,” Hillary has cast herself as the Great Enfranchiser.

It is so bogus it makes my teeth hurt.

Now, a message to the candidate…

Hillary, honestly. It’s time for a sit-down reality check. I know that having Obama come out of nowhere to take this thing from you hurts. I know that you feel that after years of serving in Bill’s shadow you deserve some respect. I totally understand how hard this is for you. You’re smarter than Bill, less flawed than Bill, and just as driven. But, Hillary, this just isn’t going to happen for you. The time, the spirit, the season, the Chief Strategist just weren’t right for you.

Hillary, you aren’t the first mighty democratic to take a run at the White House and miss. Look at Ted Kennedy. In fact, really take a look at Ted. He ran for the Oval Office and didn’t get there. He went back to the Senate and served the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the United States as the “liberal lion.” Kennedy may have never been President, but in the end, I think he has done more to really help people than he ever could have had he won the White House.

Hillary, go home. Sit with it for a bit. And then come out and campaign for Obama. I know it galls. I know it feels like a cheat. But, honestly, it’s what your country needs from you.

I shook hands with you once and told you that I’d rather vote for you than your husband. Maybe I feel a little responsible — like I gave you ideas or something. But now, I’m telling you that the fight is over. All you are doing is kicking our nominee in the teeth and it just doesn’t seem dignified.

Hillary, it’s over. Honest.

Your turn to snark! (Even you, Hillary, may snark here!)