The final act, finally

(more on the flip)
The polls seem to be saying that Obama will win North Carolina by between 7-12, and Hillary will win with a similar margin in Indiana. I won't get into the delegate math, which is largely irrelevant at this point anyway. This thing will be decided by some mass movement of remaining super-dels one way of the other, IMHO.

Which way they will move, and when, remain questions.

On the one hand, Obama remains something  a question mark because by all rights, he should have sewn this up long ago, but failed to do it. The unanswered question is, "Why?"

And, as Blake (Alec Baldwin) points out in the film, Gelngarry Glen Ross, "Coffee's for closers only."

Still, by virtually every objective measure votes, delegates and numbers of states, he will wind up ahead in this election.

Clinton, on the other hand, is a proven street fighter. She will keep comin' and comin' at you, no matter how many times you hit her. It is virtually impossible not to admire this quality in her, even if she disgusts you.

The choice is further complicated by the fact that, as it has turned out, Clinton and Obama have each become leaders of the two key components of the Democratic Party's nationwide coalition; in Clinton's case, the white middle class in the Mid-western and Northeastern strongholds, a/k/a Reagan Democrats, and in  Obama's, African Americans. These are the groups who may stay home on election day if their candidate is not declared the winner.

My own take is that Clinton has to outperform tomorrow if she wants to have a prayer of winning the nomination, and if she fails to do so, we'll start to see super-dels moving Obama's way.

First, there is the undeniable fact that Obama is ahead, and while I believe it may sometimes be prudent for party officials to overturn the will of the voters, there ought to be an unassailable reason for doing so. I can think up reasons why Clinton would make a better candidate in the general election than Obama, but all of them are assailable.

Second, there is no denying McCain's appeal among independents (although I don't think his reputation as a maverick or a straight-shooter is warranted), and Obama is the tougher candidate on this score. He has shown that he can not only attract independents, but among a highly dissatisfied electorate craving change, he is able to motivate them to get off their independent asses and vote.

Don't get me wrong. I still think Clinton can beat McCain, but only if she can hold enough traditional Democrats, because with a motivated Democratic base, she can attract enough independents to give her victory.

But she simply cannot afford to alienate any Democratic voters, and she cannot take any of them for granted. And I just don't see, in the absence of some dynamic-changing event (like a scandal), how she wins without alienating large amounts of Democrats.

Obama's appeal among independents gives him more wiggle room. If his nomination upsets some Democrats in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two critical states, Obama can compensate and still win them.

The one obvious monkey-wrench that can be trown into the works is that Hillary Clinton wins North Carolina. As unlikely as I think that is, if it happened, it would give me pause.

Comments