State of the Campaign: 27 days to the Keystone State

Former President William Jefferson Clinton just said something I agreed with: "I don't think all of these people should resign." His point- we are having an argument and we need voices to be heard. However, former President Clinton, you need prudence as well.

But, the point I need to make: According to MSNBC, NBC/ Wall Street Journal just released a poll that stated in the past week Senator Clinton's positive ratings dropped rather than Senator Obama's. Though NBC/WSJ conducted the poll during the Clinton Bosnia flap and oversampled African Americans in the poll, Senator Clinton has a net-negative in her personal rating as only 35% find her favorable while 43% hold a negative view of her. This is not a path to the nomination. But why is this the case? My reasons:

(1) Senator Clinton attacked Obama about Rev. Wright. According to Open Left: Clinton said, "He would not have been my pastor. You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend." Now, Senator Clinton's religious beliefs are under scrutinty here and here with a slight refutation here. Good luck with that. There is a reason religious beliefs need to be personal, right John Locke? But, don't expect that some topics are private as you make others public.

(2) Judas. The entailments of this metaphor is enough to turn the Super Delegates away and they are your only hope to achieve the nomination. And the idea of a Super Delegate caucus is gaining traction, and you will not win with these arguments.

(3) Bosnia- your "sleep-deprived" and "I misspoke" differentiations do not work if you used the story more than once. It also calls into question your ethos, especially your judgment at 3 AM. If you would have dropped the sniper fire and left it at you were the first First Lady to enter a war zone no one would have said a word about your experience there. Unfortunately, if you expand the argument to state you created the Internet, people will find out, especially if there is footage.

But, these are not the worst reasons. Here are two more:

(4) The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Exists and Clinton is using it to her advantage. According to The New Republic:

Anyone reading this blog is presumably aware that, over the past several weeks, Hillary Clinton has gone out of her way to repeatedly compliment John McCain at Barack Obama's expense.

But consider a few other data points:

a) Matt Drudge hyped a photo of Obama in Somali garb that he claimed (and the Clinton campaign declined to deny) Clinton staffers had been circulating.

b) Bill Clinton went on the Rush Limbaugh show on the day of the Texas primary--after Limbaugh had spent days urging GOP voters in the state to cross over and vote for Clinton in order "rig" the election and ensure that Democrats nominated the weaker of their two candidates.

c) The Clinton campaign has been circulating an article in The American Spectator alleging that an Obama adviser, former Air Force chief Merrill McPeak, is an anti-semite and a drunk. [Note- McPeak is the Obama surrogate that used the McCarthy line that I condemned the other day.]

d) When Clinton attacked Obama on Jeremiah Wright yesterday, she did it at an editorial meeting of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the vanity publication of Richard Mellon Scaife, while sitting next to Scaife himself. [Scaife was one of the main anti-Clinton forces during the 1990s and involved himself in the impeachment of former President Clinton.]

Drudge. Limbaugh. The American Spectator. Richard Mellon Scaife. What exactly is it going to take before Clinton campaign staffers recognize that they are, in essence, now working for the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy?

You cannot complain about the attacks against you if you use those sources who attack your opponent. If you were to win the nomination, you will be helpless against these people. I have argued repeatedly that Senator Clinton needed the attacks against her to gain support; but even this seems odd.

(5) Blackmailing Super Delegates. While Super Delegates can "vote their conscience" and are open to persuasion, it seems that being open to coercion and blackmail is not appropriate. According to Politico, Clinton donors asked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to reconsider her remarks about the Super Delegates supporting the pledged delegate winner or lose funding from Democrat supporters. According to Talking Points Memo, the letter to Speaker Pelosi states:

We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.

While I have praised Senator Clinton's knowledge on policy and her ability as a Senator, she needs to make her case based on her own talents. Her surrogates should follow suit. Religion, Judas, exaggerations to the point of lying, calls of antisemitism, and coercion will not help you win over Super Delegates and win the nomination. It will split the party though.

The other troubling aspect of all of this is that these tactics may hurt Senator Clinton in the future. The party elite will not forget these tactics and she, according to Maureen Dowd, who discussed Senator Clinton's options with a "Hillary Pal," Clinton not desire to return to the Senate and may be losing standing with her Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Worse if the Dems lose [read Senator Obama] and if Senator Clinton desires the top spot in 2012, her support among the political elite may not be there.

Just think, only 27 days left until something important.