January 10, 2008

More on the New Hampshire Primary

Politics of the Past or Vague Hope for the Future?

A friend with a definite way with words put the contest between Clinton and Obama this way `it's a contest between the politics of the past and a vague hope for the future' - a little sharp perhaps but not far off the mark. Time will only tell whether the differences between the two are genuine or yet another illusion.

But for now, it appears the primary season will be more interesting than has been, at least on the Democratic Party side. I'll probe the McCain phenomenon and the Republican Party dilemma in a few days. I would only mention here that those who count them out as dead in the water for 2008 should recall the past two presidential elections in which two strong - and generally liberal and intelligent Democratic Party candidates (one who just won a Nobel Prize) who should have beaten a sweetie pie like George Bush handily, esssentially handed the presidency over to the latter on a silver platter.

Yes, more than likely it was the shinnanigans in Florida in 2000 and in Ohio in 2004 that tipped the balance, but I put a good deal of the `credit' for the loss on the Democratic Leadership Council's strategy for grasping defeat out of the jaws of victory. And it could happen again. Nothing is assured. No Democratic strategist has been anything close to Karl Rove's match - he might be a darth vader type - but he's shrewd, has a political program and knows how to deliver for the Republican Party base. The DLC has been kicking the Democratic Party base - Labor, Minorities, Environmentalists, Women, the Poor - in the teeth for several decades now and frankly show no sign of letting up. Not a healthy situation.

The day before the New Hampshire Primary I was talking to a number of my colleagues at work. Three of them - none of the three no slouches - were enthoused by Obama's Iowa victory and `were sure' it would carry over to New Hampshire. We know it didn't, although I wouldn't call Obama's showing there `a defeat'. Far from it. He's in the running and it looks like he will be engaged in quite a contest in the period ahead with Hillary Clinton.

What We Need: A Good Open Fight Over Issues

And a genuine contest - in which the issues between the two candidates will become more clearly defined as they slug it out with one another - is what the country needs, especially concerning US Middle East foreign policy (the whole thing not just Iraq), Healthcare and Education Reform, undoing the Patriot Act's attack on civil rights just to name a few. It seems clear from the result of these first two primaries with their very large voter turn out that the nation will be (finally!) mobilized and that while one could argue that all US presidential elections in the past 20 years have been turning points - that this one is very important, and finally the nation understands it.

Perhaps too late?

Yes. It will be very difficult to under the structural changes in the US political body that have been forced down the throat of this nation the past seven years. One can see how little has changed since the election of a Democratic Congress. No progress on Iraq, free health care for children vetoed, impeachment proceeding against Bush and Cheney taken off the table before they could get off the ground and saber rattling against Iran still, despite the NIE Report, in full gear.

Despite one shock after another - and this going back for decades now - there is no mass based alternative party to the left of the Democrats to challenge the status quo, the Greens having, despite a generally fine political platform, too narrow a constituency and support base to mount much of a challenge, or even to significantly goose the Democrats to moving a few notches left.

Concerning the immediate future...

As mentioned below, Hillary Clinton will be a formidable candidate for Barack Obama to defeat. I don't listen to too many polls. I believe despite whatever they are saying that he is still pretty much still the underdog. Hillary has spent a good deal of time and political energy preparing for this run. Not only has she amassed a huge war chest (so has Obama) of more than $100 million but she has, with the help of hubby Bill, behind-the-scenes politican extraordinaire, been carefully lining up support from within the Democratic Party and carefully working the Democratic Party organization nationwide.

I believe that it is this - and not some cheap p.r. stunt of shedding a few tears - that turned the tide in New Hampshire. A commentator on `Democracy Now' yesterday from that state - and pretty clearly a Clinton supporter - explained Cinton's victory very well last night along these lines. Hillary had put together a strong state organization - working especially the unions (absolutely critical vote getters and vote-turner-outers) and the mainstream Democratic Party structures long and hard.

Disciplined and undaunted by the Iowa set back (an indication of their political maturity) and whipped into shape by an increasingly partisan Bill Clinton - they didn't miss a beat in New Hampshire and pulled off an impressive win. It wasn't impressive in the sense of the margin of victory, but as a political comeback it certainly showed some resilience. The main consequence: Hillary has not been knocked out, far from it, she's still the candidate to beat.

Hillary: Working Old Structures Like A Pro

I am not a fan of Hillary Clinton's.

Over the past 16 years, since 1992 her politics has moved consistently and dramatically to the right. Maybe others can forgive her for voting for the Patriot Act and approving Bush's war against Iraq. I can't. Her positions on the Middle East appear to be scripted by AIPAC and she has bought into the Bush Administration's sabre rattling against Iran. I do not believe for a second that those plans to attack Iran have been shelved nor that she has in any serious way, discouraged the little sweetie pie in the White House from letting the bombs fly against Teheran.

On domestic policy - she appears nothing less than bought off by the pharmaceutical and insurance companies. I would expect no substantial health care program from her, etc. etc. Her policy compass has been set by the Democratic Leadership Council - that sorry body that has in great measure, moved Democratic Party policy far away from the party's base, constituency and historic support for the majority of the American people. Worse - they're proud of it.

Hillary Clinton's greatest asset is her ability to work the old structures of the Democratic Party - to cut deals for support. Obama will not defeat her on that playing field where I expect she'll consolidate her support even more in the weeks and months to come. If Obama tries to beat Hillary at her own game he'll lose. Period - and New Hampshire will be on the opening salvo.

Obama's Playing Field:

Instead, he has to define his own playing field more clearly and build upon that base. Obama' strength will be in his ability to bring in the disaffected, youth - those elements that traditionally vote in low numbers because they don't care or they have long ago given up on the Democratic Party (not without reason).

And to do that, he has to offer them - as he repeated ad nauseum two nights ago - hope. But to give them - his potential constituency - hope he must offer a viable and genuine alternative beyond a commitment of appearing on Oprah once a month. He needs to sharpen his focus on the issues with concrete programs rather than slogans. To date he's offered more rhetoric than concrete ideas. He could pull this thing out, but not easily.

He should learn from Mike Miles! (our Coloradoan who made a run for the US Senate and gave Ken Salazar something of a scare a few years back). Maybe Barack should give Mike a call before it's too late.