Enough already. All through the weekend and throughout the first day of the Democratic convention, we seem to have heard nothing but commentary on "What Hillary has to do in her speech" and "What Bill Clinton has to do in his speech" and how much pressure is on Hillary and what they (Hillary and Bill) HAVE to do in their speeches. Excuse me -- who is running here?
How about what Barack Obama has to do in his speech on Thursday -- could we focus just a bit on that and not what the Clintons have to do on Tuesday and Wednesday. Obama is the candidate, and it is his convention -- and all those voters and supporters of other candidates are out there waiting and prepared for him to win them over -- not for someone else to just hand them over.
And frankly, in this case, I believe the media and general punditry industry is as much responsible for the "perceived" trouble and tension and the focus on the "problem" as the actual participants -- not to mention that I defy anyone out there to actually show me a single quote, video sound bite or reference from Hillary Clinton since she withdrew from the race that in any way criticized Senator Obama, indicated she would not support him, or indicated she was angry with him or his message. Without any actual evidence of specific negative attitudes about Senator Obama being expressed by the Clintons, or specific statements indicating they would not support him, everything else is pure speculation.
Yet, the media coverage frames the debate as if the supposition premise of the Clintons not supporting fully Barack Obama becomes the "given" that then launches the discussion pro or con. It is an arrogant assumption that is not fair, not productive, and not professional -- but it does help keep stories alive and drive ratings -- based on intelligently phrased speculation.
Well here's some information that is not speculation. As CNN and other networks reported on Monday, 66% of Clinton supporters now support Barack Obama. But that number was at 75% back in June. In other words, since Clinton withdrew and has thrown her full support behind Barack Obama, his support among Clinton voters has gone down -- not up.
Why do you think that is? Is it possible that during that period many of those voters have made their independent judgments of Obama himself, and based on that have made their current judgments? In fact, I still argue that Senator Obama's failure to define himself to the American people in general is still a core component of the problem he is now having in poll numbers all over the country - both in general numbers and in specific key battleground states where he should right now have a 10 to 15 point lead given the state of the Country. And that failure to adequately define himself has allowed others to define him to the American people instead as they have filled in the gap.
Senator Obama still has time to do that, and he certainly can make major strides in that area on Thursday night when he gives his acceptance speech. And that is why I think it is ridiculous to focus so much on what the Clintons have to do and overlook or downplay what Obama has to do in his speech.
And his job will not be easy. Back to that earlier poll I cited. I can add some independent validation to the poll's conclusions as for the last two weeks, I have done my own independent surveying of female supporters of Hillary Clinton, and in talking to almost 100 of them who would identify themselves as frustrated Clinton supporters, this is what I was able to discern.
First, for most of these voters, their reasons for not enthusiastically supporting Barack Obama has nothing to do with measuring how enthusiastic the Clintons support him now and has everything to do with what they think happened in the past. And they tell me that their concern is not whether Hillary has convinced them to support Obama but the fact that, in their minds, Obama has not convinced them to support him.
And this is interesting, the fact that the media continually focuses on Hillary's job and task ahead to accomplish this objective rather than focusing on Obama's job and task to accomplish this goal is only making these voters more angry, not less so.
Have you listened to the commentary on what Hillary has to do in her speech, and what she has to balance in her remarks -- she would have less pressure being put on her speech if she were the actual candidate. If the Democrats think that Hillary and Bill have to bring every supporter they have over to the Obama campaign with a peak level of excitement and then campaign more intensely for Obama than they would do for themselves -- if that's the measure of what's needed with no emphasis on what the actual candidate has to accomplish -- the Democrats will lose in November.
In fact, many of the Hillary supporters I talked to don't care what Hillary says or does at this point -- they do not support Obama, and unless Obama himself can win them over between now and November (I think he has to try) -- they are not coming over. That's what they told me and that's why I can certainly vouch for the results of that recent Poll.
Obama cannot get all of those voters. But the final percentage of Clinton supporters who do not vote for Obama simply cannot remain at 27% (including those unsure) -- it must come down. I don't think there is anyone in this business who doesn't believe that Hillary will do exactly what she needs to do and Bill will enhance that effort with his own performance.
So find another scapegoat -- and while you are continuing to overlook other real problems, go ahead and continue to overlook the race issue when trying to figure out why Obama is now neck and neck with McCain. That approach could be almost as productive as continuing to insist that Hillary and Bill have the biggest assignments and the most pressure and the most to accomplish at this convention.
But once Hillary and Bill are done and everyone exits "stage left", the only ones left will be the voters and Barack Obama.
The spotlight cannot be turned on someone else. Obama must walk right into it and shine in it. I believe he can do it, and I think he will. But to the world and the media, if he doesn't, don't blame the Clintons. That's the media's job, and they seem fully up to the task.
For more Huffington Post coverage of the Democratic National Convention, visit our Politics @ the DNC page, our Democratic Convention Big News Page, and our HuffPost bloggers' Twitter feed, live from Denver.