The tide must really be turning against Hillary among the DC punditocracy if even David Broder agrees that it's time for the uncommitted superdelegates to get behind Obama and end the seemingly endless Democratic primary fight. In his column today, Broder offers some insights into why so may superdelegates -- U.S. senators in particular -- have not yet endorsed a candidate, and he outlines the price that Obama -- and the Democratic party -- is paying for every day Hillary vows to fight on even though she can't win the nomination. I guess pigs are flying, because Broder makes a lot of points I agree with today.
Broder expresses his surprise that almost half (29) of the Democratic senators in Congress remain publicly silent on their presidential endorsement, even though they "desperately want the race to be over so the winner can start focusing on John McCain" and that they "have the power to bring this marathon to an end." He notes that the reason for this inexplicable hesitation is one I've been saying for some time now (and I'm paraphrasing here): these senators are spineless, fence-sitting cowards who wouldn't know true leadership if it bit them in their behinds. Senator Dick Durbin puts it a bit more politely:
"They want to avoid hard votes," Durbin told me at midweek, referring to his colleagues. "They want to be spared controversy. Most of them are looking for certainty, for inevitability, before they commit."
Durbin, who encouraged his fellow Illinoisan to run, said he thought Tuesday's results -- an Obama landslide in North Carolina and a narrow loss in Indiana -- should be enough to meet the "inevitability" standard.
But the ranks of the uncommitted senators did not thin in the days after the voting, lending force to Durbin's analysis, although Obama gained other superdelegates.
The fact that there is a 99.9999% certainty that Obama will win the Democratic nomination is not enough for these senators to commit is, quite frankly, pathetic.
But the meat of Broder's column is his analysis of the deep price the Democrats are paying for the unwillingness of party "leaders" to take a stand.
First, Obama can't rest up for the battle in the fall.
At the most personal level, it denies Obama the rest he badly needs. His friends talk with real concern about the fatigue he constantly feels and often shows. But as long as Clinton is campaigning in states that are potentially competitive in November, Obama cannot fail to show up, lest their voters think he is taking them for granted.
Second, McCain has had the luxury of time to build up his campaign and support, virtually free of intense public scrutiny.
...the iron law of politics is that time lost can never be completely recovered. Since McCain effectively cinched his nomination in February and mostly fell out of the news, he has accomplished a lot. He has targeted potential constituencies with appearances and messages tailored for them, knowing that other voters probably are not paying attention. One week recently he was hanging out with civil rights heroes and hurricane victims. Another, he was courting conservative critics of the judiciary and plugging for more business tax cuts.
After the convention, McCain can't stroke such disparate groups without being challenged for inconsistency. But for now, it's an almost cost-free way to expand and solidify his support.
Third, focusing on the primaries robs Obama of the time he needs to shore up support among various constituent groups where we may be a bit vulnerable, as McCain is doing right now.
Obama needs to do similar work, but because the nomination fight goes on, he doesn't have the time or relative obscurity to do it. To take but one example, primary results all across the country have shown that he is a stranger to many Latinos. If Clinton weren't still challenging, he could easily devote a week to a swing through Hispanic enclaves from California to New York.
None of these prices that Obama and the party are paying are so high that they can't be overcome. But by dragging out the primary battle even though the conclusion is certain, the uncommitted superdelegates need to recognize that their lack of leadership is not cost-free. As Broder concludes:
... those supercautious superdelegates ought to understand how precious time is in every campaign.