Opinion
No cease-fire needed in primary war
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by John Sprangers:
- Why not scrutinize religion? (April 17, 2008)
- No cease-fire needed in primary war (April 3, 2008)
- Obama to placate extremist jihadists (March 13, 2008)
- As general election approaches, Obama faces uphill battle (February 28, 2008)
- Debate victory a credit to issues (February 14, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
It may have sounded funny to hear 61-year-old former President Bill Clinton tell Democrats to “just chill out.” Yet that may have been the most intelligent thing he’s said during this campaign.
Once riding high with two stellar presidential candidates, Democrats are freaked. While they’re stuck in this endless quagmire of a primary, Republicans have already begun to rally around their nominee, Sen. John McCain.
Worse yet, a Democratic party that was previously unified in optimism has now split into two, and the rhetoric flying between the sides has been nearly as nasty as the volleys between Democrats and Republicans that we’ve grown numbly accustomed to.
Obamaniacs want Ms. Clinton to drop out; Clintonites argue that Mr. Obama’s actual support has been exaggerated by the nominating process. The former think Ms. Clinton is sabotaging her party’s chances; the latter fear that the feel-good Obama campaign can’t handle the doom and gloom of the general election. And now, amidst this hoopla, a Franklin and Marshall College poll revealed that one-fifth of Mr. Obama’s supporters would not vote for Ms. Clinton in the general election and vice versa.
Seriously, enough! Democrats have a right to be frustrated in the process’s inability to produce a candidate, and they should worry that the Obama and Clinton campaigns will weaken each other as that process drags on.
But Democratic voters deserve the most blame for letting their competitive passions overcome their reason. A reasonable Democratic voter would not absolutely support one of these two candidates and refuse to vote for the other.
This primary is like the famous Stanford Prison Experiment — put neutral individuals in antagonistic roles, and the dynamic of the relationship synthetically creates animosity. Democrats who one year ago would have appreciated the two candidates equally for their similar politics now claim to love one unconditionally and loathe the other.
No matter what the true believers of either side say, though, they have a lot to like in the other candidate. In the Obama/Clinton debates there have been two voices — one a melodious baritone, the other a hoarse alto — but one message.
Both want out of Iraq ASAP. Both want to drastically expand health care coverage — and I’m pretty confident that most voters who claim to have a principled reason for supporting one plan over the other are exaggerating their case. Both are calling for a new era of diplomacy, for college tax credits and for a path to legalization for illegal immigrants already here. Both pander to unions and manufacturing workers on trade but would probably end up furthering liberalization. Heck, both even play a mean game of canasta and secretly enjoy Will Smith’s Big Willie Style. OK, so the last part isn’t true, but you get the point — they’re a lot alike, at least when it comes to politics.
For some supporters of Mr. Obama, though, it’s not Ms. Clinton’s politics but the conduct of her campaign and her refusal to leave the race that’s irritating. Mathematically, they argue, it’s just about impossible for her to take the lead in delegates or the popular vote. All she’s doing by persevering is hurting the inevitable nominee’s chances against Mr. McCain — and feeding her enormous ego.
I see where they’re coming from, but I don’t think the situation is as cut or dry as they portray it. As Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus notes, “at a comparable point in the 1984 race, Gary Hart was more than 600 delegates behind Walter Mondale” and “in 1980, Ted Kennedy lagged Jimmy Carter by nearly 1,000 delegates.” Ms. Clinton only trails Mr. Obama by about 130 — can’t she stay out and play a little longer?
According to some respected analysts, such as U.S. News’ Michael Barone, it’s not impossible for Ms. Clinton to take the lead in the Democratic popular vote. And those analysts who dismiss her chances do so by projecting final delegate counts from polling numbers in the states yet to vote, but polls have been way off the mark more than once this season. I plead the Fifth on whether Ms. Clinton is right to forge ahead, but with so much uncertainty remaining, I can’t blame her.
The cross-party antagonism, then, doesn’t seem justified. Let’s just hope it doesn’t last. As the primary race will continue, the ability of Democrats on either side of the divide to remain philosophical and keep the peace will determine whether the groundswell of Democratic excitement can last until November. One thing is nearly certain — neither candidate will win then with a fifth of the other’s supporters not participating or voting Republican.
So, all you crazy Dems, listen to Dr. Bill and take a chill pill for your ill will.
Maybe a protracted primary season isn’t ideal, but we still have two candidates worth celebrating and a great chance to take back the White House.
John Sprangers (sprangers@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in political science and international studies.
2 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
The Dems reap what they sow… I voted Kerry in 2004, but I really hope they lose this year. I think McCain would be an epic disaster, but doubt that either of the Dem candidates could be significantly better. Maybe it will be a wake up call for this country that our electoral system is a failure and marginalizes significant sectors of our population. And hopefully it will be a wake up call for the Dems that they need to stop dragging discourse to the right, and embrace the left voters who will make or break the party. The farther right they go, the more divisive they are, the more they set themselves up for failure. Nader or McKinney may be spoilers this year, but it’s only the fault of Obama/Clinton if they are.
Obama could win 40 plus states in the GE. He has the ability to “un-marginalize” our population. It is the Media that has driven home the 51-49 mentality.