From the beginning of the final race for the Democratic presidential nomination between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, it seemed inevitable that this moment would come. Both candidates were described as “historic” in nature – one an African-American, the other a woman. Victory for either would be heralded as a watershed moment in American history, when we stood up as a society and declared that either sexism or racism had been overcome at last. Barriers had been torn down, and we truly did provide opportunity for all, judging our candidates on the content of their character rather than either the color of their skin or the genitalia in their trousers and/or pant suits. But what of the candidate who came up short?
With the race drawing to a close and Obama greeting record crowds in Oregon as the presumtive nominee, we are already seeing the reverse side of the historic coin. The New York Times delivers the obituary of the Clinton campaign and the inevitable analysis of how great a role sexism played in her defeat. Many opinions and incidents of perceived slights are offered, but in the end the article raises a more intriguing question. Racism was obviously a factor in Obama’s run, and he seemed ready and willing to open a national dialogue on the subject. But since sexism was clearly playing a similar possible role in Clinton’s run, why didn’t she begin a similar conversation and tackle the question head on?
Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, many women say with regret, did not inspire a deep or nuanced conversation between men and women, only familiar gender-war battles consisting of male gibes and her supporters’ angry responses. Mr. Obama, who sought to minimize the role of race in his candidacy, led something of a national dialogue about it, but Mrs. Clinton, who made womanhood an explicit part of her run, seemed unwilling or unable to talk candidly about gender.
Mrs. Clinton, for example, declined a New York Times request earlier this year for an interview about the sexual dynamics of the race; her aides said the topic would be impossible for her to address in a frank way.
No matter how this primary race turned out, it was perhaps unavoidable that the runner-up would spark hurt feelings and recriminations on perceived discrimination. To understand this a bit better, we need only imagine if the final pairing had been between either of these candidates and John Edwards. (Keeping in mind that, throughout the earlier phase of the primary, Edwards had lower negatives, higher approval ratings, and polled better for his chances of defeating John McCain in November than either Clinton or Obama. He simply never built up any traction this year.) Supporters and super delegates alike could have fearlessly thrown John Edwards under the bus. After all, it’s not as if throngs of disaffected Democrats were going to take to the streets with a great gnashing of teeth and rending of garments over the unfair treatment wealthy white male trial lawyers receive in America.
But given the nature of the two finalists, this fight was unavoidable and wholly predictable. With the end now in sight, racism is dead in America (or at least among Democrats) but sexism is alive and well, tearing the country and the party asunder. The biggest question remaining, of course, is whether or not that divide will be closed after June 3 – whether Obama is capable of healing the rift and if Clinton is even inclined to see it healed. As the Times piece reports, there is already movement afoot to ensure that does not happen.
Nancy Wait, 55, a social worker in Columbia City, Ind., said Mr. Obama was far less qualified than Mrs. Clinton and described as condescending his recent assurances that Mrs. Clinton should stay in the race as long as she liked. Ms. Wait said she would “absolutely, positively not” vote for him come fall.
Cynthia Ruccia, 55, a sales director for Mary Kay cosmetics in Columbus, Ohio, is organizing a group, Clinton Supporters Count Too, of mostly women in swing states who plan to campaign against Mr. Obama in November. “We, the most loyal constituency, are being told to sit down, shut up and get to the back of the bus,” she said.
I’m willing to bet at this point that Howard Dean is desperately wishing John Edwards could have beaten one of them in the early days of the primary. The “Wealthy White Trial Lawyers to Stop Obama” campaign probably wouldn’t have drawn much attention.