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 ([email protected])
is a senior majoring in political science
and international studies.