Harping on a Moot Point

[babylonsister]

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2008/05/harping-on-moot-point.html

Harping on a Moot Point


The Clinton campaign and its many surrogates are obsessed with pointing that Clinton has done better than Obama among low-income white voters in the primaries. They argue, to anyone who will listen, that Clinton's strength among this demographic means that she would be a stronger general election candidate than Obama. Putting aside the merits of that particular argument in some hypothetical universe, can someone please explain the concept of 'mootness' to Clinton supporters?

Perhaps it's true (though I doubt it) that, all things being equal, Clinton would be a stronger general election candidate. The point, however, is that all things are not equal. As things stand now, Obama has an insurmountable lead among pledged delegates and will, in all likelihood, end up with more popular votes than Clinton. So the only way that Clinton can win is by convincing the superdelegates to give the nomination to the candidate who comes in second in both delegates and votes.

Now, I seriously doubt that's going to happen, but if it did, the candidate who emerged would be very damaged. She would be the nominee of an utterly fractured party. Obama's supporters would not consider her to be the legitimate winner, much the way Democrats considered Bush's 2000 election win to be illegitimate. African-Americans (and many others) would be insensed that the first black candidate with a real shot at the presidency was denied his chance by a coup of party insiders. Whatever support Clinton has among blue collar whites (and I think that support is vastly overstated) would likely be offset by the disillusionment and resentment among many other groups, including African-Americans, young voters, and the many first-time voters who have turned out for Obama.

To put things another way, Obama can win the nomination in a way that everyone will consider to be legitimate, in a way that doesn't shatter the Democratic coalition. Clinton cannot. So at this point, Obama is necessarily the most electable candidate. It makes no sense to consider general election matchups in a vacuum. Clinton can only win if Obama is denied the nomination, and he's just come too far at this point to be denied the nomination. He's the presumptive nominee, and if that is taken away from him (at least by anything other than a self-induced implosion), there will be hell to pay.

So the question of Obama's weakness among blue-collar whites is at best a moot point at this stage in the game. Obviously he'll need to address any weaknesses in his coalition as we move toward the general election, but at this point, there is no other viable alternative. Clinton is too far behind to win this nomination in anything other than a deeply controversial way. And winning that way would make her a much weaker candidate. There's no getting around that.

[OhioChick]

1. She's Through

And should gracefully concede, already.

K&R

[Cha]

2. Some brilliant cartoonist has to

do one on the Mootness of it all.



hilary the divider.

[BlooInBloo]

4. And it's TEH AWESOMEZ watching Clinton supporting DUers go along with it.

[Zhade]

3. Indeed. She's done.

Accept your loss, clinton.

[PretzelWarrior]

5. Send people in Hillary camp HERE

and send Hillary here while you're at it

http://www.coping.org/grief/denial.htm

-------------SNIP---------------------------------

Dealing With Denial
Content:

What is denial?
How does denial look to others?
What are the negative consequences of unresolved denial?
How can we confront denial in ourselves?
How can we cope with denial in others?
A denial intervention model


Unresolved denial can result in:

Delusional thinking, leading to a feeling that everything is OK, even when it is not.

Greater conflict between the deniers and the non-deniers.

Fantasy or magical thinking, allowing distorted thinking to become a habit.

Poor problem-solving and decision-making abilities for the denier.

The denier totally avoiding or withdrawing from everyone who knows of the loss or problem.

The denier becoming a social recluse.

Others avoiding the denier to avoid upsetting him with their concern, questions, or reassurance.

Frustration for those who want to help the denier.

A maladaptive pattern of coping with the loss or problem for the denier.

Everyone involved in the life of the denier joining the denial; the problem is not confronted honestly by those who can do something about it.

Resentment by the denier of those who are confronting him about the problems or loss.

Prolonging the time before the denier must confront the pain, hurt, and suffering involved in the loss or problem.

The denier projecting the problem or the results of the loss onto others.

The denier's use of rationalization to explain away the problem or loss.

Exacerbation of the very problems being denied.

[roseBudd]

6. In addition it would be deleterious to the future Democratic party.

The newly enthusiastic young voters are a dividend that accrues to Obama, not Clinton. Clinton's success is with elderly voters who will be dieing. Young Democratic voters have many future election cycles to participate in. I's going to take more than 4 years to get this nation back on track.

[Usrename]

7. She's a lap down, with two laps to go.

She's trying to shoot out his tires in order to win. She thinks folks will reward her if she succeeds.

I bet she thought we would be greeted as liberators.

[PretzelWarrior]

9. good analogy

doesn't the mere fact that she's dragging this out and dragging the party down on it's own show she lacks judgement to lead?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. She has made herself the icon of the "give us pablum" wing of the party.

The one that her husband championed in his campaigns and presidency. She is the last great hope of the discredited "Third Way", "not as bas as the Republicans", "don't rock the boat", not "too liberal", diehards who steered the party into a pale imitation of the Republicans.

She exemplifies politics at it's self-serving smarmiest where winning office supersedes common decency and plays to the lowest common denominator of fear.

She has cast her opponent in the role of a radical, an angry black man, a threat to the white working class, a weakling who will bow to the bogeyman of the day.

She is continuing to campaign, not in defense of principle, but in defense of no-principles.

[boppers]

10. Dead girl or live boy.

She still has that chance. :evilgrin: