An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Hillary can give more pain to Barack

The emerging shape of battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is not reassuring. Obama won hearts because he filled them with hope for an America marked by cleaner politics and more ethical interaction with the world. Clinton won many minds by making those who worry about America’s enemies and economic troubles feel that she offers a more masterly set of hands at the tiller.

She played dirty but Barack kept the high road until the shocks of Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. It now seems that he too is stepping into the dirt and readying for a knife fight with the wily lady. This should give everyone pause for thought because it opens new ways in which Hillary can give pain to Barack.

It’s early days but European analysts are already turning away from Barack. For them, he does not seem to have what it takes to change America. Instead the American electorate is changing him. He looked blue-collar America in the eye in Ohio and blinked.

Even that was done too late to convince the working classes that he is not an upper middle class white American who is using his black skin color to make us believe that he knows life on slummy urban streets or the red neck rural and industrial heartland.

He looked like a person on whose fresh vision we could depend without doubt. That seems dubious now. Suddenly, for him as well the race is boiling down to one word, “Character”. Does he have the spine to do what he promised to all those hundreds of thousands whose money contributions through the Internet have made him a candidate far richer than Hillary?

Like a crusty village battle-axe wanting to tear at her opponent’s hair in an alley, Hillary has needled Barack into losing his lofty composure. Her repeated taunts have made him doubt himself and he is preparing to knee-cap her if she tries to knee-cap him.

Whatever his skills at digging up her and Bill’s murky finances and cloaked shenanigans, he cannot hope to win a street fight with her. People always, in any country, go for the underdog in such cases and she is the underdog regardless of how deftly she knifes at his gut because she is a woman. There is no way in which Barack can change that.

The elite punditry of America seems mesmerized by the math of Barack’s lead and equates it with his popularity among people. Being close to the terrain, they are losing sight of the forest. Blue collar America rules the nation through the ballot box and Barack has failed to bring hope to that vital base of the pyramid.

In the end, the super delegates will do whatever they think will keep the Democrats united and in favor with voters. What they say now is not necessarily what they will do when the time comes, since even a day is a long time in politics.

Barack attracts the middle layer and some at the pyramid’s top with his fine thoughts about raising the human and moral quality of the average citizen. But that average citizen is more worried about bread on the table and adequate shelter right now than refining his self-development or making America more respected around the world for its moral values and love of peace.

Both Hillary and Barack plaintively suggest in turn that the media caused some of their reverses. This is a self-serving charge to cover their failures at communication since both are experts at manipulating the media for their own ends and each is surrounded by consultants familiar with how it works.

Barack is caught between a rock and a hard place. If he fights dirty, he will betray those who fought in his corner so far. Will he then reimburse those who poured millions into this campaign through the web?

If he sticks to the high road, he may lose the knife fight. The only way to win without rolling in the mud is to tell blue collar America why he can do more for it than Hillary. It may already be too late for that. In any case, he seems short on ideas.

Thus to the surprise of many, Hillary may laugh all the way to the bank. Math counts for less than irrational emotion in the privacy of the ballot box. Right now she has the kind of emotional high ground that appeals to voters struggling to make ends meet after pay day. The super delegates will not be insensitive to that.

  • cosmoetica
    From your piece, Brij, I take it you do not live in the USA, because your assessment of the American system and what folk are thinking is simply distorted.

    1) O has a delegate lead
    2) O has about a 6-799k popular vote lead
    3) there is no way Hillary will be able to make either deficit up
    4) she will end up, at best, down 120 or so delegates, and down 500k+ votes
    5) that's at best
    6) the Dems will not commit hari-kiri by pulling a Bush 2000 and selecting Hillary
    7 because the Obamaheads wd walk, and Big Mac would kill Hill the Chill
    8) because O will not take a VP slot when he shd be the #1 guy
    9) black people would pull a Rodney King if the first black Prez candidate w a real shot at winning is screwed
    10) Obama is more electable because he can win in states Hillary cannot
    11) because Hillary is eking out wins in the traditional Dem strongholds
    12) but O is blowing her out in Red states
    13) therefore, Hill's campaign against Mac wd be a defensive one cuz no red state will go blue for her
    14) because she has no appeal to Indies
    15) while O does appeal to Indies more than Mac
    16) and O draws Rep voters, while Hill does not
    17) therefore a Mac-O matchup would put Mac on the defensive and O on the offensive
    18) because O can win Red states
    19) and he's done this all by actually living up to his promise not to fight dirty
    20) where Hill only has dirt left and will lose fairly.
  • elrod
    So African Americans don't count as "blue collar America?" I love the racially normalized assumptions. Hillary is not even strong among blue collar whites. She lost them in Wisconsin and Maryland. Where she's won blue collar whites, it's been by a fairly small margin - and the gender gap is very strong here. He does fine among blue collar men but she wins big among blue collar women. The only place where Hillary Clinton is truly strong is among Appalachian whites. If not for the Appalachian counties in southeast Ohio, she would have barely won Ohio. She won 81% of the vote in Portsmouth, for example, and ran up other massive margins along the West Virginia border. And as a resident of Appalachia, I can assure you that at least part of the reason for Hillary's success in Appalachia is skin color. Is this what the superdelegates should be rewarding?

    Also, the superdelegates will not overturn the pledged delegate lead. If they do, you can count on African Americans staying home in November. And then it's President John McCain. The superdelegates are not impressed by silly meta-analysis about knife fighters. They look at electability, polls, and most importantly, the pledged delegate lead up to that point. The know that choosing Hillary over Obama based on some dubious calculus will destroy the party. They aren't stupid.
  • elrod
    I should add that Obama does have to watch how he fights. But I don't think he would ever lose the moral high ground to Hillary Clinton on this. Remember, dirty campaigning is relative. As long as Hillary fights dirty, Obama just has to fight less dirty in order to keep his reputation in check. What's interesting is that the first time Obama went after her she turned from vicious attacker to whiny victim complaining about Ken Starr. And that made her look even worse. Also, Obama let Samantha Powers go, which proves his willingness to keep it as clean as possible. When is Howard Wolfson going to quit for calling Obama Ken Starr (who really is a monster).

    What works best for Obama is when he makes a substantive charge about Hillary's position and it sticks. I'm talking about her bogus foreign policy experience claims, which look laughable every day. Are white men in Pennsylvania going to be impressed by her national security credibility because she showed up in Sarajevo to sing with Sinbad and Sheryl Crow? She raised the national security issue and now she will pay for it.
  • Holly_in_Cincinnati
    Sen. Obama is neither qualified nor electable. My Democratic Party will kill itself AND lose in November if it nominates Sen. Obama
  • cosmoetica
    Holly's analysis: <fart>

    My analysis:

    1) O has a delegate lead
    2) O has about a 6-799k popular vote lead
    3) there is no way Hillary will be able to make either deficit up
    4) she will end up, at best, down 120 or so delegates, and down 500k+ votes
    5) that's at best
    6) the Dems will not commit hari-kiri by pulling a Bush 2000 and selecting Hillary
    7 because the Obamaheads wd walk, and Big Mac would kill Hill the Chill
    8) because O will not take a VP slot when he shd be the #1 guy
    9) black people would pull a Rodney King if the first black Prez candidate w a real shot at winning is screwed
    10) Obama is more electable because he can win in states Hillary cannot
    11) because Hillary is eking out wins in the traditional Dem strongholds
    12) but O is blowing her out in Red states
    13) therefore, Hill's campaign against Mac wd be a defensive one cuz no red state will go blue for her
    14) because she has no appeal to Indies
    15) while O does appeal to Indies more than Mac
    16) and O draws Rep voters, while Hill does not
    17) therefore a Mac-O matchup would put Mac on the defensive and O on the offensive
    18) because O can win Red states
    19) and he's done this all by actually living up to his promise not to fight dirty
    20) where Hill only has dirt left and will lose fairly.

    Any questions?
  • I hope Obama is right that the dirt won't play this time. Obama's idealistic supporters will gladly yield the knife for him against the old, dirty, money and power grubbing Hillzilla.

    Fear or hope, Hillary? Listen to your husband, you know, the one who was making the decisions and doing the negotiations in the West Wing while you occupied the East Wing. Or did she and Bill violate national security laws to bring her in on critical national security decisions without security clearance? Not that he, or she and he made such great decisions, come to think of it. Guess we'll have to judge based the documentation of her experience. Oh yeah, she wants that kept secret. We're supposed to take her word for it.

    Hillary's actual experience? "Thin gruel"
  • archangel
    Mr. Khindaria lives in India, is an East Indian. Like the translations of other nations' writers filed by some of our cobloggers at TMV, views from across the ocean are 'very varied' in ideas, facts and imaginings...as they often are here in North America and South America also

    Dr.e
  • cosmoetica
    Dr. E:

    That explains the wherefore of his flawed rational, but not its why.
  • Lit3Bolt
    Re: holly

    I don't want your Democratic party.

    Lit3
  • joegandelman
    I need to add that I lived in India, which is where I met Swaraaj, who was one of my best friends in New Delhi. Brij is giving us another perspective on things. And if you have lived abroad in one or two countries you learn that perceptions do vary. There's nothing wrong with that...it's just fun I believe to look at another perspective. And who's to say the view from here is correct? When I lived overseas in 1970s some of the best and most perceptive stuff came from the BBC (which is what I listened to for my broadcast news source in New Delhi and Madrid). In any event, Brijs columns.

    Also: people are and do differ on Obama and Hillary and it's increasingl clear that each side is feeling stronger and stronger about it. I'm wondering how the Demmies can unite. This is not your usual rivalry so far...
  • joegandelman
    I can't edit m comments on this system so it's cut off but I was saying that brij's columns give us one more view on tmv and i'm someone who surfs the internet for hours reading all kinds of views. I realize later that my original view on some things might not have been as correct as I thought.
  • DLS
    You know fully well he brought her in (or she brought herself in) where she didn't belong. She was co-President for eight years. It was often her rather than him making decisions in the White House.

    Note that Obama's support comes more from the younger voters, while Clinton's comes from the older voters, and industrial areas in Ohio and elsewhere feature an aging work force. (Don't any of you recall the problems GM and Ford have with their "legacy costs," which aren't just decisions made long ago but which involve huge payments in pensions and health care costs to retirees?) Naturally they are not going to rush to vote for a "fresh, new face" when Clinton is already a Dem insider with ties to unions and such.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC