To Win, and To Win Fairly
4:31 pm - May 24th 2008
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
Oh, the twists and turns of the Democrats Primary season! Now its Hillary’s turn to feel the heat, after she invoked the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in a discussion over the lengthy nomination process:
My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it.
The implication from many quarters is that Senator Clinton is hanging in there on the off-chance that Senator Obama is murdered. However, if you watch the YouTube of her interview (with the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader) its clear that is not what she is saying. The operative word here is quite obviously ‘June’ and not ‘assassinated’.
Now, I’m an Obama fan, and wish Clinton would drop out of the race. The controversy a few weeks ago surrounding comments from Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor, was ruthlessly exploited by the Clinton campaign. If this comment about Bobby Kennedy sinks her, there would be a real sense of schadenfreud, reap-what-you-sow and (to borrow a phrase from Wright) chickens coming home to roost.
However, Obama is really supposed to be above all that. He is running on the rhetoric of change, to wash the disingenuity from Washington politics. For the knock-out punch to be landed so unfairly would be a shame. It would show that such dirty politics is still legitimate. Victory, for Obama, would be less sweet.
Meanwhile, there is an ongoing debate within the Democratic Party as to whether the Florida and Michigan delegations, previously banned for breaking the DNC’s rules governing primaries, should be seated. Clinton argues that they should, and of course stands to benefit if that happens. Obama argues that they should not, because they broke the rules, and everyone agreed not to campaign there. Currently, Obama has the moral high-ground here, and the consensus is that this view will prevail.
However, a little piece of gossip threatens this claim. It is rumoured that 40 or so Super-Delegates are planning to defect from Hillary Clinton, and endorse Barack Obama. Over at The Field, Al Giordano hints:
Cardoza is one of the leaders of this effort (which includes not only superdelegates, but here’s something that should set off some paranoia in Camp Clinton: there are pledged Clinton delegates in “The Cardoza 40,” too).
Emphasis mine. Obama should not be welcoming other people’s pledged delegates into his fold. These people, unlike the super-delegates, have been awarded their position on the basis of a popular vote in favour of Senator Clinton. To condone her delegates to vote instead for Obama is profoundly undemocratic, and unworthy of the Illinois Senator’s inspiring rhetoric. Let us hope he distances himself from this possibility.
Winning makes history, and confers power. But winning in the right way is just as important, because it generates goodwill and political capital.
All this reminds me of Manchester United’s Champions League victory on Wednesday evening. Yes, they won, and lifted the trophy. But their achievement is sullied by the manner in which it came about. The previous win, in 1999, will be more highly regarded, and will be more fondly remembered.
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |  |
Robert Sharp designed the Liberal Conspiracy site. He is Head of Campaigns at English PEN, a blogger, and a founder of digital design company Fifty Nine Productions. For more of this sort of thing, visit Rob's eponymous blog or follow him on Twitter @robertsharp59. All posts here are written in a personal capacity, obviously.
· Other posts by Robert Sharp
Story Filed Under: Blog ,United States
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
hah! I was just about to post on this too. Aaron emailed me last night with the huff-po link and I thought at first that Kennedy had been assassinated! Heh.
Anyway, that side, Clinton really is sinking to some new depths to keep her campaign going.
The delegates rumour has been circulating for a while, and to be honest if it were going to happen I would have thought it would have already happened. There were some rumours following Super Tuesday and again after Pennsylvania this was going to happen.
If it does happen though, there might be some delegates among those numbers but they’re mostly super-delegates.
At this point I feel sorry for Obama because he can’t sound too arrogant since he’s on the cusp, while Clinton can pretty much throw the kitchen sink (and she’s trying it) to keep the doubts alive.
I’m not so sure that she had such good intentions. Remember she said something very similar about the assassination of JFK in January.
I would be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt once but not twice. I think there are very few things that she wouldn’t say in order to get in power and in that respect she’s only saying what most candidates would be thinking in her circumstances. The difference is that most politicians would have stepped back from the brink.
It is so close to the end of the Democratic nomination process that most of us have made up our minds about who we like. Can we have a poll for us UK citizens who can’t influence the choice: Hillary, Obama or Any One But?
The whole charade outcry about what Clinton said just demonstrates the stupefying vacuity of most of the mainstream American media outlets. Even the blogosphere was polluted with the college-level equivalent of “OMG She wants Obama dead!” and frankly if I wanted that sort of pointless knee-jerk reaction, I’d read the Daily Mail.
I largely agree with the point made here that winning gracefully is better than just winning, but then is that ever possible in American politics? Whenever the Democrats finally choose their nominee, the Republicans will start hammering away with their attack ads – take a look at You Tube, there’s a great selection on different upcoming races. One in particular is a California ad which attacks a candidate for taking money from “West Coast Liberals.” I’m inclined to ask, are they worse than East Coast Liberals?
Anyway, my point is that no one wins gracefully and I doubt Obama will be the exception once we move beyond Primary season – both sides are always equally as bad at slinging mud and turning everything into bitesize attacks and jingoism. It’s not good for politics, it’s not good for dialogue and it’s not good for the average joe who wants to sit down and try and make a reasoned comparison. But that’s what you get when democracy isn’t in the hands of the people and is instead regulated by those who benefit from just this type of sloganeering.
One can only hope that YouTube and other technologies allow truth and reason to prevail. Indeed, I decided to side with Clinton on this point after watching the entire video (linked above) online. Left to the ‘mainstream’ I would have probably have bought in to the more hysterical point of view.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
