I drafted this diary (and put it on MyDD) before Hillary's RFK reference, and before several SDs endorsed Barack today. So while I realize the backlash she gets from that may blunt some of my arguments, I am posting this anyway because I still hope people will find it an interesting look at the campaign.
Let me start by saying that I am someone who is a Obama supporter, volunteer, and modest donor, and also as someone who thinks Hillary should be the VP nominee. In the last several days, I have started to realize that there is a lot of parallel between the path that led to Obama virtually securing the nomination the path that may now be leading to Hillary as the VP nominee, forced against his will.
If Barack did not want Hillary as VP, then I think he has made a lot of the same mistakes that she made to cost her the nomination. In my opinion, he has made a lot of decisions that worked fine for winning the nomination but also have resulted in her supporters getting riled up against him. To me, many of these decisions parallel some of the decisions that she made that have cost her so dearly.
Some examples:
- Hillary misunderstood the game and made a lot of tactical errors, particulary related to caucus states.
Barack overestimated the value of his mathematical advantage. Yes, she couldn't get the nomination away from him, but she could certainly attain enough momentum at the end that her supporters get really charged up and cause trouble (which they are doing).
- Hillary made a major mistake not strongly opposing the shutout of MI and FL in 2007. She thought she would win anyways, so why cause a stir.
Barack took basically the same tact when he did not more forcefully try to get re-votes in those two states. He figured, if they don't vote, I'll win. Well, he is going to win, and I think Barack supporters can argue there were some unfair disadvantages to him on a MI revote. That said, his stance has given her a perceived moral ground that is again getting her supporters riled up.
As it turns out, if there were revotes scheduled in FL and MI for June 10 or so, he would still be in commanding position, but she would have no basis for the enfranchisement arguments she is making now.
- Hillary did not campaign in several states where she was going to get killed after Feb 5 in the hopes of making her last stand in OH, TX, and PA. I'm not sure how much better she might have done, but boy she would sure have benefited if she could have reduced his margin by 50 delegates or so (25 from him going to 25 for her). As it was, the narrative became how badly Barack was beating her, and it hurt her chances.
Barack was in the same situation in KY and WV. In his case, he didn't hurt his chances to win the nomination. But, by allowing himself to get beaten so badly, he allowed the narrative of his weakness and her strength among white working class folks in that region to get magnified.
In my opinion, if he wins OR by 8 and loses KY by 26, he would have been much better off then with OR by 18 and KY by 36. KY by 26 would have suggested WV to be somewhat of an aberration. And of course, if he could have kept WV closer to 25 to 30, it would also have helped mitigate his supposed weakness.
- Hillary's campaign showed insensivity to Barack being black. I don't think they ever said anything racist, but they certainly made comments that appeared to many blacks as having diminished his candidacy (e.g., comparing him to Jesse Jackson in SC, etc.). My mother reminds me that these folks aren't racist and they got treated unfairly. My personal opinion is that they weren't racist, but I think they were trying to dimish his candidacy.
But it doesn't matter what I think. What the AA voters thought is that it was time to put the smack down on Hillary, starting in SC. While my mother also points out that Hillary is not the one who made the comments, I explained to her that Hillary's campaign should have realized at the outset that there should be NO COMMENTS ABOUT RACE WHATSOEVER. Bill and Hillary should know you don't take any chances that something you say will be misconstrued.
Barack has done some of this, as well. He called the reporter "sweetie", he referred to her as "Annie Oakley", etc. I think the "sweetie" comment was a mistake, but to me, being upset about Annie Oakley is unfair. But again, he did things that women are now remembering and using as a justification to vote against him.
His bittergate comment also showed an insensivity that cost him big time. He wasn't trying to insult anybody, he just said something stupid. Look how much impact that had.
- And my last one is that both ignored narrative as it relates to SDs. Hillary though SDs might bail her out if she won OH and TX, but she did not account for the fact that they were not going to take the nomination from an AA pledged delegate winner without a really extreme situation. For what it's worth, I don't think they would have taken it from a white male pledged delegate winner either, but it was even more unlikely with an AA because of the glass ceiling impact.
And Barack did not account for the fact that when he let her crush him in WV and KY almost without contesting, that was going to cause some SDs to pause and consider whether they need to pressure him to choosing her. I don't know any inner workings, and I have read there is not inner pressure being applied by SDs to make him pick her. But, as of now, he has not been gaining as many SDs in the last few days as he had been gaining previously.
I think there is more, and I know there are ways these two paths are not parallel, but I've made my point and can allow others to pile on.
From my perspective, just as Hillary put herself in the position from where she could not likely win the nomination (and let's face it, if Barack doesn't have his bittergate moment, it's even this close), Barack is now in a situation where he is probably going to have to pick her (at least before this RFK comment). There appear to be enough rabid Hillary supporters that he puts his election in jeopardy if he doesn't take her.
I've heard so many folks say that a lot of these voters will come back to him, and she doesn't bring anything to the ticket, but I couldn't disagree more. She brings some negative baggage, but no VP candidate ever has the potential to bring more voters affirmatively to the ticket. Why? Because Hillary as VP breaks a huge glass ceiling, and while Geraldine Ferraro also was in this position, you cannot compare the impact of these two. Hillary has millions of people who want her as VP, and I suspect many are not going to vote for him if he doesn't pick her.
Once he won NC and barely lost IN, he needed to realize that all she really had left to salvage was a VP nomination. If he wanted to prevent that, he needed to focus on that more than the GE. What could he have done? Probably the biggest problem he has right now is how much better she is polling than he is.
He is polling fine, but she is doing unbelievably well right now. Any of the smart strategists know this is very misleading as she has had a free run for a few weeks while Barack and McBush have gone at it. Barack has actually risen lately, but not like she has. This has caused her hard-core supporters to feel like the SDs should be giving the nomination to the candidate with these great GE numbers, and so when they don't, they are starting to feel like they've been cheated.
I'm not sure how much of an impact different tactics (like continuing to fight her for votes) could have had, but he did not pay attention to the impact polling might have on SDs and on her supporters, and because of that, he is in a situation where he may have to pick her or risk losing a lot of her supporters.
I will also add that I will be very pleased if he picks her, and I think she has every right to fight for the VP nod. A lot of Barack's supporters are begruding her and suggesting she is fighting dirty right now, but I don't agree. She has not said anything negative about him lately other than that her polling results are much better than his. If he didn't like that, he should have focused on this more. She certainly could be talking about the fact that he helped block the revotes (with good reasons IMO), but she hasn't.
I agree that I would prefer if she would have been more of a team player and just let things take their course, but she wants to be VP, and being ambitious is not a crime. She has earned the right to fight for it, and fight for it she is doing. She is taking great advantage out of the fact that Barack is not really in position to fight back without risking alienating her supporters even more.
From my perspective, good for her. I am absolutely dedicated to supporting Barack now and through to November, but if he didn't want this, he should have had his eye on this part of the ball.
By the way, for the poll below, I had about 60 responses on my DD and close to 70% were for Barack supporters. Hillary as VP lost by about 60/30 with 80% of Barack supporters opposed.