The neck-and-neck narrative
From Politico:
Journalists have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.
In fact, says the post,
But let’s assume a best-case scenario for Clinton, one where she wins every remaining contest with 60 percent of the vote (an unlikely outcome since she has hit that level in only three states so far — her home state of New York, Rhode Island and Arkansas).
Even then, she would still be behind Obama in delegates.
The post is about why the media portrays a contest Hillary is highly unlikely to win as a neck-and-neck horse race.
(As an Obama supporter, I’m reluctant to blog this since I have never been right.)
Certainly the media likes drama, but there is legitimate drama here. It’s not neck and neck, but there’s potential for this to go nuclear.
Politico misses one scenario, that of *seating* the Florida and Michigan delegates. Everyone agrees that a revote is now out, a turn of events which can be laid squarely at the feet of the Obama campaign. This has improved the odds, but raised the stakes.
If Clinton does well in the remaining states–particularly Pennsylvania–she’ll be close enough that the issue will turn on whether Florida and Michigan are seated, something the Clinton camp has indicated they will press for. The outcome of that battle may well be certain, but it could get very bitter. An Obama victory narrative that turns on superdelegates and “not counting” Florida would sour many on the process. Florida polls already show 20% of Democratic voters say it makes them less likely to vote Democratic in the general election.
So, while it’s not neck and neck, things may get very ugly at the finishing line.
It does look like the Democratic Party is really trying to shoot itself in both feet, not that there is anything the DNC can do about it. Although the Democrats should be able to win against the party that has gutted the economy with its policies, it can only be successful with a suitable candidate. Both Clinton and Obama have much going against them. Obama can draw a large majority of the black vote but will lose a huge number of votes of people who will not support a black candidate or are suspicious of his muslim background, whether justified or not. Clinton would not get the black vote she needs nor the votes of people who would not vote for a woman. I feel that neither candidate can win the election. The convention needs to be deadlocked and a candidate suitable to everyone nominated. I would love to see an Al Gore/John Edwards team. Is something like that even possible?