Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. He has an insurmountable pledged delegate lead, he has won and will win the most states, and he has won and will win the popular vote. Clinton cannot catch up to him in these three areas.
And forget about Michigan and Florida. Yes, these delegations will be seated at the convention in some form, but they cannot and will not be counted towards the nomination so long as there remains a contested race between Senators Obama and Clinton, and the reason for that is their inclusion would be a paramount injustice to the Obama campaign since they followed the DNC rules of the game and did not participate or campaign in those aforementioned elections. Indeed, since everyone knew that the elections were nothing more than beauty contests at the time (and yes, even Hillary Clinton herself pledged that those contests were nothing more than beauty contest that would mean nothing in the delegate count), many people did not vote who would have if the election really mattered.
So give up the dream of Michigan and Florida. So long as Clinton continues to contest the race, they will not be included.
So without Michigan and Florida, there is no chance in any reality or dimension known to exist that Hillary Clinton can win the popular vote.
So, explain to me, illustrious Clinton supporters, how Hillary Clinton is going to win the nomination?
Ah, I know the answer you are going to give me! She will convince both pledged and super delegates to overturn the will of the Democratic Party electorate and take the nomination away from Obama, so as to give it to her.
Now, whereas including Michigan and Florida is unfair, unjust, and against the rules, this tactic is only unfair and unjust. But it is perfectly within the rules. A novel concept: A Clinton Strategy that operates within the rules of the game. But I digress.
So while coup by superdelegate is perfectfully legal, and within the rules, have you Clinton supporters fully grasped the monumental and disasterous consequences of pursuing that path to the nomination? Do you fully understand that winning the nomination in that fashion guarantees her landslide loss to John McCain?
How is that?
Well, let me explain.
The Democratic Party depends on the African American vote to win elections. Without it, it simply does not win elections. Period. We will be a permanent minority party without the African American vote.
There is no question that the Democratic Party cannot win without the support of African American voters in 2004 {...}. African-Americans are the most loyal block of voters the Democratic Party has, supporting it in numbers that far exceed their percentage of the U.S. electorate. Just look at the numbers. In 1996, Bill Clinton trailed Bob Dole among whites 46 to 43 percent, but got 84 percent of the African American vote and won the election handily. In 2000, Al Gore won an historic 90 percent of the African American vote, which was critical to his success in the popular vote. Given the increased polarization of the electorate and the disappearing "swing voter" in 2004, African-American voters are more important than ever.
Donna Brazile, 2004, Black Commentator.
Without the African American vote, President Clinton loses his reelection to Bob Dole. Without it, Al Gore loses to George W. Bush, for real this time, without any drama concerning Florida or the Supreme Court.
And without African American support, Hillary Clinton will lose in a landslide to John McCain.
So it is puzzling why Hillary Clinton and her supporters continue to pursue the nomination, knowing full well that having the superdelegates dethrone the pledged delegate leader and the popular vote leader and the states won leader will be seen as illegitimate by the African American community as a whole. It will be just another in a long line of examples where a black man was cheated out of something. And given the tone of Hillary Clinton's campaign, many will view this action as racially motivated. So, what motivation will they have to come out and vote for the "cheater," the person who "stole" the nomination away from one of their own. Perception is everything in politics, and no one needs remind the Clintons of that fact.
So tell me, why do they expect African Americans to vote for her when they will perceive that she stole the nomination away from Obama because he is a black man? While that may not be true, it will be the perception. And because of that, many African Americans will not vote for Hillary Clinton.
So tell me, Clinton supporters, how does Hillary win the election in the fall without the levels of African American support Democrats are accostumed to?
And don't tell me she will make up the votes elsewhere. Where? Republicans will not vote for Hillary over McCain. She will not win the majority of Independents versus McCain. Indeed, she may not even the votes of many white Democrats, like myself. For the first time in my life, I am considering not voting for my party's nominee in the fall. The reasons are well known by now: I find Hillary's campaign tactics borderline racist and explicitly Rovian. And I would find her nomination illegitimate and unjust. I am a loyal yellow dog party hack Democrat. I vote for all Democrats, any Democrat, anywhere, anytime. And yet, Hillary may not get my vote. No, I won't be voting for John McCain. I would write in someone or not vote at all. And if I am considering this action, as a loyal yellow dog party hack Democrat, what will other liberals and progressives, who are not unflinching devoted to the Party as I am, do?
So how does Hillary Clinton win a general election? How?
Finally, I have one more question. I know that many of Hillary's supporters are women who support Hillary primarily and most vehemently and passionately because she is a woman. My mother and my aunts are Hillary supporters, and they cite her sex and their primary motivating factor behind their support of her. My mom and aunts have said to me that they have been waiting their whole lives to see a woman as President, and damnit, it is their turn. I don't bregrudge them that sentiment. I understand it. But my question is this: At what point does your desire to see a woman president trump all else? At what point does it trump honesty, integrity, liberal, progressive and Democratic principles? Do the "ends justify the means," and if they do, isn't that a new form of sexism?
Think about that and I look forward to your answers, since I know we have many Clintonistas here today.