I know many of us are tired of being told all of Obama’s victory are in states that didn’t matter. Today’s Time article by Michael Grunwald will put a smile back on your face, at least momentarily:
Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton for the ninth and tenth straight time last night, with blowouts in Wisconsin and Hawaii. Needless to say, this means nothing. As Clinton strategist Mark Penn explained yesterday, Wisconsin has a lot of independent voters, so it doesn’t really matter. And Hawaii is practically Obama’s home state, so it obviously doesn’t matter. Anyway, as Penn said recently, “winning Democratic primaries is not a qualification or a sign of who can win the general election.” It’s apparently not even a sign of who can win the Democratic nomination — at least not when the victories are Obama’s.
The Clinton spin machine has been consistent about this. Nebraska, Idaho and Utah didn’t matter because they were deep-red states. South Carolina, Louisiana and Georgia didn’t matter because they had large percentages of black voters. Maine and Washington didn’t matter because caucuses aren’t truly representative. Maryland and Virginia didn’t matter because Obama was expected to win there. For a moment, it looked like Missouri might matter when the networks called it for Hillary — her campaign quickly bragged about winning a “closely contested toss-up state” — but the networks were wrong. On the other hand, it looked like Nevada wasn’t going to matter at all because there were polling stations in casinos, but it ended up huge because Hillary won. …
Spin works best when it’s intermittent and plausible; the Clinton camp’s has been constant and ludicrous. Is it really wise to dismiss the vast majority of the United States as insignificant? Does anyone believe that the misguided attack on Obama’s kindergarten ambitions was “a joke”? Explain to us again why Michigan’s delegates should be seated even though Democrats agreed not to campaign there and Obama wasn’t even on the ballot? Why are we supposed to ignore Wisconsin when it’s got exactly the demographics that Penn has assured us are part of Hillary’s “enduring coalition,” back when Hillary had a massive lead in the state and just about every other state?
He ends the piece by saying the only spin they’ve put out that appears at least reasonably mired in reality is the “where’s the beef” question re Obama’s experience. Of course, those of us who have looked for the beef and found it right where it was supposed to be, know how this one is going to turn out.
Our best leaders weren’t the ones who told us, in plodding terms, of their accomplishments, even if they had many. Our greatest leaders have been the ones who moved the Overton window, who taught us new things using, amazingly enough, words, who reminded us that their election wasn’t about what they could do for us, but what we could and should do for each other.
Sorry, Hillary. It seems it’s not the states you’re losing that don’t matter. It’s you. After March 4, I hope you’ll have the decency to give up this futile quest and let the party come together behind the most exciting candidate we’ve had in 40 years.
