Opportunity Costs

Today's Washington Post:

As Rivals Battle, McCain Builds November Machine

As his Democratic presidential rivals squabble, Sen. John McCain has moved to transform his ragtag primary campaign into a general-election operation by boosting fundraising, establishing control over the Republican National Committee, and beginning a conversation with voters who live in states where he has not campaigned...

Some Republican strategists have said that McCain has not made the best use of the extra time that the prolonged Democratic nomination battle has given him. They have criticized the pace and direction of his decisions and have questioned why the senator from Arizona has not held more fundraisers to close the huge financial gap between him and his rivals.

Some people claim that Democrats will benefit more by having a longer primary, even though there's no conceivable way Hillary Clinton can overtake Barack Obama for the lead among pledged delegates, and there's little indication that superdelegates will want to flip the lead to Clinton.  Furthermore, it's likely that Obama will amass a lead of superdelegates by the end of the primary and caucus voting.  So Clinton's chance of becoming the nominee are essentially nil.

While there are certainly some benefits of mobilizing Dem voters in primaries, we're forgoing the opportunity to define McCain early, to make a sharp contrast between Obama and McCain, and put the race away early, much like Bill Clinton was able to do against Bob Dole as he emerged weakened and broke from a tough primary battle in 1996.  There's an opportunity cost that's not being fully considered by those who argue for Clinton to continue her futile effort to become the Democratic nominee.  

Here's what McCain is doing:

Polls suggest that McCain's position on the sidelines of Democrats' infighting has elevated his stature, at least for now. In some surveys, McCain has a slight edge over Obama and Clinton. And conservative Republicans appear to be growing more comfortable with the sometimes maverick senator as their nominee.

But McCain's advisers acknowledge that the Republican Party still has an image problem. Generic ballot tests, whether for presidential or congressional elections, show Republicans running well behind Democrats, and part of the campaign's goal is to start rebranding the GOP.

Were the Obama campaign not occupied with not letting Clinton back in the race, they could take advantage of the opportunity to define McCain early and deny him the opportunity to try to rehabilitate the image of the Republican party.  This is an opportunity cost we're paying by having an extended primary after it's already clear Obama will be the nominee.  We're not taking advantage of the opportunity to, as I heard one fairly ruthless politico say metaphorically, "kill him in the crib."  

Nonetheless, we have to deal with weak arguments like this, from Ruth Marcus in the WaPo:

The unyielding arithmetic of the Democrats' delegate selection rules makes Hillary Clinton's prospects of winning the nomination dim -- and that's the rosy scenario.
The prolonged primary contest, with candidates and aides bickering like cranky toddlers partway through a long, hot car ride, is bad for the Democratic Party.

Still, Clinton shouldn't drop out. Not yet, anyway.

The party adopted procedures for picking the nominee that no one expected would matter. Now, having worked hard and played by those rules, to employ a Clintonian phrase, Clinton is under pressure to quit before the game is over.

Why should she? Clinton trails Barack Obama by at least 133 delegates. At a comparable point in the 1984 race, Gary Hart was more than 600 delegates behind Walter Mondale. At this stage in 1980, Ted Kennedy lagged Jimmy Carter by nearly 1,000 delegates.

Please, remind me, how did those elections turn out for Democrats, that election in 1980 and that other one in 1984?