Will Clinton Be a Help or a Drag in the General Election?
Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:48:56 AM PDT
No matter what happens in PA, the nomination of Obama as the Democratic nominee seems likely in the end. Most Democrats would like a quick end to the acrimonious Primary campaign. A united Party with Clinton and Obama working together to defeat McCain is the dream of many activists as well as rank and file democrats.
The Dream Ticket looks very unlikely now. We can at least hope for a photo-op with the two contenders smiling and hugging. What, after that? There is reason to believe that Sen. Clinton is at least as likely to be a drag on the Democraric GE campaign as an asset. Sure, she has a little less than half of the Democratic Party supporting her. According to polls, 80% of them will continue to support the eventual Democratic nominee, even if it is not Sen. Clinton. The remaining 20%, which is 3 to 5% of the total electorate, says they will not vote for Obama. This is within the margin of error of most National Polls.
To be fair a similar percentage of Obama supporters say the same about Sen. Clinton. But since Clinton is unlikely to be the nominee, we won't analyze it further.
Even the 3-5% is likely to be en exaggerated number, born of the frustrations of her once inevitable candidacy foundering. Still, let us take this number at face value and see what that implies. Let us even assume that all of this 5% will vote for Obama if Clinton supports him. The question is thus, will we gain more than 5% by ditching Sen. Clinton ?
What are disadvantages of having Sen. Clinton play a large role in the Democratic General Election? The largest role will be as the VP candidate right on the ticket with Obama. A smaller role will be as the keynote speaker and campaign surrogate touring the country in her own airplane with reporters in tow. With an occasional joint appearance with Obama at key regions of the country.
First, her presence will energize the virulent anti-Clinton base within the Republican Party. Right now they are rooting for her as she is the easier candidate to beat. If she in fact a strong presence in the campaign, especially as the VP nominee, McCain will have no trouble uniting the conservative base to his cause. Rush Limbaugh and his cohorts will let out a whoop of joy and go to work against her instead trying to sneak into the Democratic Primaries to vote for her as they do now. This ought to be worth at least 5% all by itself.
Second, there is a large percentage of moderates who just totally despise Sen. Clinton. If 60% of Democrats even think she cannot be trusted, you can imagine what moderates and independents think of her. The blowout victories Obama scored were in open contests. The Clinton even tried to spin it against Obama, that he is somehow being propelled by the independents rather than traditional moderates. It is hard to estimate a percentage of the electorate here, but it is not hard to imagine that 5% of the electorate falls in this category.
Thus Party unity, as nice as it sounds, comes with a price. Let is call it the Clinton drag.
What are the advantages of not ditching Sen. Clinton? Sen. Clinton brings nothing to the plate in terms of new voters. The younger the demographics, the less popular she becomes. She can bring in a group of organziers and activists. But frankly, do we need the idiots who have run her campaign right into the ground, starting with every advantage imaginable? Our own operatives have proved far more nimble and have run circles around them.
She used to have a large donor base back when she was thought of as inevitable, but many of them will abandon her as soon as she loses. You can already see her former supporters scrambling to leave the ship, despite phone calls from Bill and Chelsea asking "Why, Why?" . Still Sen. Clinton will argue that she can be great help in fundraising, especially in Hollywood and Wall Street.
A politician is beholden to the people who donate money to him or her. This is just a simple fact of humn nature. No amount of posturing can hide the fact. The best situation is for a campaign to be funded by a large number or small donors spread throughout the country, so that no group can control the outcome. This is the ideal that public financing and campaign finance reform was supposed to achieve. Obama has truly achieved that goalnow, in a way that would have been unimaginable before the internet revolution.
Obama should announce a boycott of Democratic fatcats, such as the ones that tried to Pressure Speaker Pelosi to combine with his boycott of Corporate PACs and Federal Lobbyists. Each dollar he loses by that will be gained many times over from a horde of small donors who will feel empowered. It will also free him of the last hold that the Clintons will have on him as a nominee.
Sen. Clinton will be a constant drag on the campaign also in terms of news coverage. She will be to the Obama campaign what Bill Clinton is to hers now: a distraction, a loose cannon. Better to encourage a dignified retreat to Chappaqua after a pro-forma show of unity at the convention.
So what can Sen. Clinton do for Obama? It seems to me very little. Other than just going away for a few months till November. She just is not worth the 5% she brings in. What am I missing here?
Permalink | 112 comments