When I read articles like this one, I'm not surprised by the post-Super Tuesday flameout of the Clinton campaign. Since I'm not a Serious Columnist like, say, David Broder, I can only speak for myself, but when Hillary's campaign started floating the idea of challenging the DNC's decision not to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations, it made me less likely to vote for her. The kicker is that they started with that talk before things really started spiraling away from them...so if I were, say, David Broder, I might say something like, "To everyday Americans, and especially the salt-of-the-earth backbone of the old Democratic machine, this sort of legalistic noisemaking served as a not-so-pleasant reminder of the Clintons' propensity to seek victory by any means necessary." I'm also partial to this one: "One friend of mine, a lifelong Democrat, emailed me last night to say that she was starting to see what her Republican friends have always found so infuriating about the Clintons."
Like I said, though, I'm not a Serious Columnist, so I'm stuck with just my opinion, which is this: by threating to challenge the Texas system in court, before the Texas primary even happens, the Clinton campaign is likely to drive a fair-sized number of voters into the Obama camp by driving home Obama's argument that we need a new kind of politics for him. At the end of the day, the only people in the Clinton campaign who would benefit from a lawsuit would be the lawyers (curse our oily hides!), who get paid win or lose.
I guess desperate is as desperate does.
[EDIT: h/t to memorandum. Where are my manners this morning?]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment