Monday, January 28, 2008

Obama's Dilemma, Clinton's End-Game

Obama's landslide victory over Clinton and Edwards in the SC primary this past Saturday demonstrated the strength of his organization, grassroots support, and campaign message. He won by double digits riding on the wave of African American support (a whopping 80%) but at the same time, failed to broaden his appeal among White voters. This presents a dilemma for the Obama campaign as they look forward to Super Tuesday on Feb. 5 when the majority of the 22 states have closed primaries and increased White, Hispanic and Asian American voters. Should his campaign focus on states with strong African American presence such as GA, AL, and MO, or divert resources to more expensive, but delegate rich states such as CA, NY, NJ, and AZ where Clinton is leading by double digits? Latest polls show Obama only leading Clinton in GA but competitive in MO, AL and TN.

Clinton, on the other hand, has aggressively campaigned in Super Tuesday states since winning the Nevada caucuses. By down-playing SC, Clinton risks permanently damaging relations with a substantial bloc of core democratic constituencies that make up about 15% of general election voters she desperately needs to win in November. The Clinton campaign probably calculated that winning White, Hispanic, elderly, and female voters may be enough to eke out and win the nomination, and ask for redemption by selecting Obama or someone with an indisputable civil rights record for the #2 spot at the convention. Both campaigns face tough choices ahead. One thing is certain, the only campaign without a choice is Edwards'. Having lost four crucial primaries, Edward's game may not reach Super Tuesday.

2 comments:

UrBoo said...

Steve, when did you become such a political animal? I remember your pledge to campaign for Hillary if she ever ran for president. Well, here we are. Let me tell you, I find your blogs entries more valuable when they focus on principals rather than campaign keywords like ‘momentum,’ ‘wedge issues,’ and ‘change.’ Those trite terms suggest a kind of petty, interest-group driven campaign strategy. What is really at stake in this election are our principals as partners in global society. The candidate who pursues “50% plus 1” strategy or runs a textbook, technocratic won’t win the critical mass of newly awakened voters: those formerly angry or apathetic individuals who’ve been on the sidelines for the past eight years. Voters are likely to value the candidate who provides unifying a vision for the future and not one tethered to politics of yesterday. No matter how much we might long for it, the status quo ante bellum is impossible given the global, political paradigm shift after 9/11, war, and threats of global warming, geopolitics, and economic uncertainty. I think the democratic presidential nominee will not be the political savvy, insider, technocrat but one who provides the inspiration and hope for the future—a path out of the darkness and destruction and the politics of fear and division. For the last eight years, some of us have been dreaming of a better America, a better world. Tomorrow primary results will show that, I believe, we are ready to build one.

UrBoo said...

(Principals versus principles) Steve, when did you become such a political animal? I remember your pledge to campaign for Hillary if she ever ran for president. Well, here we are. Let me tell you, I find your blogs entries more valuable when they focus on principles rather than campaign keywords like ‘momentum,’ ‘wedge issues,’ and ‘change.’ Those trite terms suggest a kind of petty, interest-group driven campaign strategy. What is really at stake in this election are our principles as partners in global society. The candidate who pursues “50% plus 1” strategy or runs a textbook, technocratic won’t win the critical mass of newly awakened voters: those formerly angry or apathetic individuals who’ve been on the sidelines for the past eight years. Voters are likely to value the candidate who provides unifying a vision for the future and not one tethered to politics of yesterday. No matter how much we might long for it, the status quo ante bellum is impossible given the global, political paradigm shift after 9/11, war, and threat of global warming, economic uncertainty, and shifting geopolitical realities. I think the democratic presidential nominee will not be the political savvy, insider, technocrat but one who provides the inspiration and hope for the future—a path out of the darkness and destruction and the politics of fear and division. For the last eight years, some of us have been dreaming of a better America, a better world. Tomorrow's primary results will show, I believe, we are ready to build one.