As Will Rogers once famously stated, "I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!" Heading into the endgame of the current nomination season, this aphorism has never been more apt, and the fault lines in the Democratic coalition are becoming ever more clear. Hillary Clinton has gotten the votes of older voters, white women, Latinos, lower-middle income voters, and voters with less formal education. Barack Obama has received his votes from younger voters, African-American voters, those considered upper-class, and voters with increased formal education.
In the general election, most of these Democratic voters will solidify behind the eventual nominee. However, there are two demographic groups - young voters and African-Americans - who could not show up if Hillary Clinton is the nominee. Not only will it likely mean a loss in the general election against John McCain, but it will fracture the Democratic Party at a time when we have a chance to claim a transformative majority in Congress.
Simply put, Hillary Clinton at the top of the Democratic ticket spells doom.
(Preface: I'm going to admit that some of this analysis is purely conjecture on my part, but I think a good deal of it can be backed up empirically)
First, I'm going to address young voters. Yes, we (and by we, I mean the under-30 age demographic) get a lot of flack for not participating in the political process. However, our turnout has been going up in recent years. In 2004, youth participation was up to 47%, up 9% from 2000. Similarly, youth participation increased to 24% in the 2006 midterm elections, better than participation in the 2002 elections. Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence that young voters are increasingly voting Democratic; in the 2006 midterm elections, young voters voted Democratic in House races by a 20% margin and voted Democratic in Senate races by a 27% margin. Given the continued unpopularity of the Republican Party under George W. Bush, these margins may continue to hold - or even increase - in the coming years...
...if we don't nominate Hillary Clinton. While it's undeniable that Clinton's run for the White House has allowed her to command a strong majority of the female vote, that enthusiasm is not filtering down to young voters. In fact, she's probably one of the most disliked politicians amongst youth voters after the current administration. To boot: the "One Million Strong for Barack Obama" Facebook group that was written about in the Washington Post has over 496,000 members right now. The individual Barack Obama Facebook page has over 681,000 people. Contrast this with Hillary Clinton's page, which has a mere 132,000+ supporters. Perhaps more importantly, look at the Facebook group titled "One Million Strong Against Hillary". It has over 926,000 members - outpacing the support for Obama (keep in mind that there is probably an immense amount of overlap between the aforementioned Obama groups). This phenomenon was blogged about over at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer website, where it noted that there are many negative groups aimed at Clinton - and Obama is the topic of many more positive ones.
A Hillary Clinton nomination will dissuade an entire generation of young people from being involved in the Democratic Party. My generation may have been fairly young when the battles of the 1990s were fought, but they still do not view her that favorably. Young voters are the seeds for the transformative nature that this election could bring. If we lock in an entire generation of voters as strongly Democratic, we can bring a broad Democratic majority to govern for a generation.
Second, African-American voters will be vitally important to the continued vitality of the Democratic Party. While they have become a staunch part of the base, they have also gone strongly for Barack Obama - and in large part due to the race-baiting comments that Bill Clinton engaged in before the South Carolina primary. But it hasn't been just that - whether it was Andrew Cuomo's 'shuck and jive' comments, Bob Kerrey's insinuations that Obama attended a madrassa, Hillary Clinton's own comments demeaning Martin Luther King's work, or Geraldine Ferraro's straight-up racist remarks (and the even-more absurd defense of those comments) - there has been a continued pattern of insults towards African-American voters.
Let's put this in the context of electoral politics: the African-American vote went to both Al Gore and John Kerry by a huge margin - both received about 90%. Given the continued alienation of minority support by Hillary Clinton, her husband, and their surrogates, it's quite possible that this percentage could drop. Consider that African-American participation in the 2004 election increased 25% - and Kerry still lost the election. If African-American support is depressed due to the Clinton campaign essentially stealing the nomination (which is realistically the only way they can win it now), or even flips to McCain by a factor of 5-10%, we will get shellacked in the general election. If Clinton is the nominee, this is an extremely likely scenario and would mean that the Democratic Party would have to engage in a lot of reconciliation with a community that is absolutely integral to our electoral prospects.
In conclusion, there's no way we can afford to have Hillary Clinton be the nominee. Aside from the fact that it's highly unlikely at this point, it will squander our chances at locking in a strong Democratic majority within the Millennials - something that could give us electoral dominance for a generation. And her nomination will almost certainly damage core support from the African-American community. Sending Bill Clinton to black churches won't be able to repair the damage that his wife's campaign has inflicted over the course of the past few months. The repercussions could be felt within the Democratic Party for decades...without the continued strong support - and voting participation from African-Americans - the Democratic Party would be relegated to minority status for the foreseeable future.
The Democratic Party can't afford Hillary Clinton as the nominee because it will destroy the party - and that's without even mentioning the devastating effects of re-instituting the DLC/Clinton machine in the party infrastructure. To nominate her is to enforce a death wish upon our electoral chances.