Imagine

A lot has been written and said since the West Virginia primary about what recent results indicate in regard to Barack Obama's chances in a general election. Some of it's been said by pundits, in print and on television, and some of it's been said by mere citizens. A lot of it's been said by Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff. "He can't win," the argument seems to go. There are a lot of "hard working" people who'll never vote for a black man, and that's why we're staying in the race.

But I've got questions for Senator Clinton, her campaign staff, and her supporters. Do you think he can't win on his own, once his flaws have been picked apart by both Republicans and members of his own party? Or, do you think he couldn't win, even with your quick endorsement and unambivalent support?

For instance, what if the results of the most recent primaries had been followed by a statement from Hillary Clinton saying that she'd seen the exit polls, and that anyone who said they'd never vote for an African American candidate ought to be ashamed of themselves? It wouldn't be a revolutionary statement for Hilary Clinton to make. After all, doesn't she condemn the thinking that would lead a voter to make such a statement? And, if she does, then why would she choose, as she did, to try to expose and exploit the stated bigotry for her own gain, as opposed to condemning it? It's puzzled me. Down by an insurmountable margin, the opportunity was there to state that the reason given by many voters for opposing Obama were reprehensible. Yet she didn't do that. Talk about a missed opportunity to exit on high ground.

I assume there are those who'll say it's not her job to support another candidate while a primary race is still being run. But there is no mathematical way for her to win the primary race. There is only the hope -- and the possibility -- of exposing and exploiting Barack Obama's shortcomings, and the concurrent bigotry of much of the voting public, to the point where he is transformed from a viable, though flawed, candidate, into an unviable one. Which leads me back to another version of my original question: If sincere efforts by Senator Clinton and her supporters could lead to either Senator Obama's victory, or his defeat, why wouldn't they exercise their substantial influence for the former?

I took a certain amount of heat for my last entry here at Huffington Post, as have several others who've been critical of Senator Clinton's continued candidacy. "Sigh," read one response to my post. "You missed a spot on that dead horse, Mr. Handler." The next was more to the point. "What a jerk," it said.

The general thrust of these opinions was that being openly critical of Clinton's candidacy invited retribution in autumn. "Nothing is more dangerous than a cornered animal," stated one such concerned citizen. "But if you allow an escape route, most wild animals will take it."

If I can use the same analogy without agreeing she's a wild or a cornered animal, I'm saying there was a gallant escape route which she chose not to take.

Again, another respondent was more succinct: "You're going to eat your words in the fall when 25% of Hillary's supporters shut down your candidate."

It's that last statement that scares the hell out of me. There is anger about Hillary Clinton's apparent defeat that's being directed at a candidate whose positions are nearly identical to hers. There's talk of a movement to ensure his defeat to someone whose positions are diametrically opposed to hers. There are a substantial number of people who even say they'll go out and vote for the Republican candidate, John McCain -- a man, and a party, who are devoted to continuing to destroy much of what Senator Clinton has worked for her whole life. Why? Has Barack Obama abused her during the campaign? Or, is his somewhat extraordinary popularity at such a young age so much of an insult that they'd throw all principles away just to see him, and his supporters, thwarted?

I've spent some time imagining how transformative it would have been if a statement from Senator Clinton had emerged immediately following the West Virginia primary, or any time since. "I'm pleased to have the support of so many Americans who believe I would better represent them as President of the United States. However, the reasons given by many of those supporters troubles me. We are, and should be, long past the time when a man's skin color, or a woman's gender, should have any impact on whether or not he or she receives your vote. I'd like to be the first woman to serve as president of the United States. Senator Obama would like to be the first American of African decent to hold the office. Each one of us is qualified to serve. If I'm chosen as the candidate of my party, I'll hope for, and expect, Senator Obama's unwavering support. And if he is the party's eventually nominee, he'll certainly have mine -- just as he should have the unwavering support of anyone who has supported me."

Imagine that.

My new book is in stores now! It's Only Temporary: The Good News and the Bad News of Being Alive. Find out more about it at evanhandler.com.

Comments

[S1m0n]

Obama can win without or without Hillary Clinton. The question is moot.

[hotwingconspiracy]

Simon, are you sure about that? She's got nearly 50 per cent of the Democratic vote. That's a lot of people to dismiss so easily.

[allonfla]

There is a large percentage of that vote who have enough common sense to vote for the nominee no matter who it is. Why assume that ALL Hillary supporters would not vote for Obama.

Her supporters are not being dismissed. She lost and that does not mean she automatically gets the VP spot.

[aht772e]

in Iowa (for instance) Hillary came in 3rd, behind edwards and Obama. Does that mean that if hillary were the candidate that less than 1/3 of dems would vote for hillary? I am from Pa (rememeber bitter , guns, churches) and I guarantee that ther is no way that a republican wins this state...ab­solutely no way, we could be running kucinich.

ridiculous, the republican party is damaged goods, at thsi point an edsel, with a president with approval ratings of 28% , losing congressional seats that have gone republican for decades. Hillary had EVERY political machine, name recognition, and goodwill(from bill's presidency) as tools to use and still lost. Dems and independants, even republicans will vote agaisnt a continuation of the ruination of our country by those currently in power.

[CeciliaBertrand]

Much of that vote is early before her claws decided to stay out 24/7. a lot of early voters no longer like her and tons have joined the Obama group - many regret voting for her - my God, especially in California­....they are willing to have a revote - just so she doesn't think she can use those early votes. No way she actually has 50% -- not in reality, not anymore. That is why the Nomination cannot be manipulated for her, too many people who KNOW - realize that a lot of what she had, she no longer has. She is making her case with rabble rousers who have no concept of what is really going on. All her big money LEFT the building long ago - she has been in free-fall since February - Obama has it in the bag. Hillary is being "handled" until it is okay to cut her loose. If Puerto Rico is it, then the lights go out - and it is elementary if she chooses to stand there in the dark. The Nominee has work to do, a nation to rebuild and one more dirty clan to get out of office. He has already prevailed over the dirty Clintons.

[BillZBubb]

Lets see, HIllary Clinton, BIll Clinton, and her supporters have been demonized by the Obama supporters. The Clintons have been accused of racism. Her supporters have been accused of racism. Or of being uneducated rubes.

So, they are going to forget all the mud slung by the Obama fanatics and fall in line? Not likely. Obama's problem isn't his race--it's his fanatical supporters who will say anything to attack someone who questions his sainthood.

Working class whites aren't voting for Obama because he offers them NOTHING in the economic sphere. He's got right leaning Goolsbee whispering economic nonsense in his ear. They remember the good economy under Clinton and see Hillary Clinton as the best agent to get back on track. That is not racism, nor is it ignorant.

Because he is an African American and the first to be a viable presidential candidate, Obama has working class African Americans voting for him in a solid bloc. Is that racism?

There is not much Hillary Clinton can say to her supporters that would really help Obama. He has to help himself. The first step would be to offer a serious economic and health care plan that is based on reality and not Goolsbee's Chicago school nonsense.

[newsjunkie8]

Because he is an African American and the first to be a viable presidential candidate, Obama has working class African Americans voting for him in a solid bloc. Is that racism?

There is a underlying difference between the two.

When blacks vote for BHO it is because of admiration.
When those in KY vote for HRC it is because of hate and ignorance.

I am not saying this for all working class whites and not even working class whites that support HRC. Though to say that it is not a factor is to ignore exit polls, and experiences that I have had in those states.

[allonfla]

African-Americans want to see a Black person in the White House. This country was built on our backs for FREE and we were denied basic human rights. The right to vote, marry, own property, breathe, etc. So when a Black candidate comes along that has a serious chance at becoming the next POTUS, YOU BET YOUR A$$ WE ARE GOING TO STAND BEHIND HIM. If he wasn't in the race, Blacks would vote for a White person. Some of Hillary's supporters have clearly stated they would not vote for Obama because he is Black - that's racism.

Is it sexist when a female votes for Clinton because they want to see a woman in the White House?

By the way, stop playing the victim, it is so pathetic and tired. Clinton supporters have given as much they got. I don't believe that all of her supporters are like the ones that spit their venom all over these blogs and so I'm not worried. The smart supporters on BOTH sides will come together and drown you phonies, on BOTH sides, OUT!!!

[aht772e]

how about about " above all else we are democrats, and any nominee, including my opponent would be significant improvements over past and future republicans. That although obama and i have some differences they pale in comparison to the differences we have with the corporate divisive party whose only purpose is to line the pockets of rich friends, eliminate the chance for universal healthcare, and that will surely nominate anti populist, antifeminist, anti civil rights judges and this must be prevented regardless of which one of us ends up being the candidate. "

It seems to me that clinton has already said that she is "honored" to be in the race with Obama, and that she will support the democratic nominee, so why , as her supporter , wouldn't you?

it also seems to me that Obama's policies are merely different in nuance from clinton's, and any policies promised by a president are inherently modified by congress and conditions, making those nuanced differences meaningless. I seem to remember hillary promising us healthcare in 92. I don't blame her intentions, but as you can see, we never got close to what was promised.

[akjain87]

Let me make a suggestion.

She is not 'in it to win it' anymore. She is in it to finish the game she started. There maybe to percieveable way for her to win, but she doesnot want to walk off the court before the clock stops.

I believe she is in it so that she can say that she was the first viable female candidate to compete in all 50 states, amass an unprecendented amount of vote and not get pushed out of the race despite the catcalls and the unbelieveable disparagement of her character. She has set a new standard and new bar by which women will judged in the future as she has shown her toughness, her tenacity, her grit and determination.

That is what this is about. So I think we should all just calm down and let the voting finish.

[nopartygal]

This is what comes of being on "teams", instead of closely watching and listening to what's going on. A voter should be fluid and judicious in his judgments, not just latch on to one candidate and blindly follow to the end. As we get to know our candidates better, I think it is much healthier - for us, for the country - if we reevaluate as we go along and feel free to jump camps, parties, whatever. In the end, we want to vote for the candidate who most closely represents our own needs, our ideals, no? Why shoot yourself in the foot with all the faux loyalty? Once again, we need to actually 'see' who our candidates really are, not just attach our own little brand of fairytale visions and expectations to one of them and then be surprised when things don't end up going along with those expectations. Try to remember that all the candidates are human (a none too reassuring characteristic, right off the bat) and so none of them will actually measure up to our highest ideals. They may sound like they will, but, ultimately, you can lay odds that they won't. The best we can do is hope for the best. That we don't end up with another sweet-talking, very convincing Nancy Pelosi-type, who knows how to charm the pants off everyone while on the campaign trail, then does a complete about-face just as soon as she is firmly ensconced in the power seat.

[WTB]

Hmm. Just after West Virginia, didn't she say this (on May 13 in Charleston, WV)?

"And I believe that this campaign has been good for the Democratic Party and good for our country. People are discussing and debating issues. They are turning out in record numbers to register and to vote. There is an excitement about politics that is the lifeblood of our democracy.

"For me, this election isn't about who's in or who's out or who's up or who's down. It’s about the common threads that tie us together – rich and poor, young and old, black and white, Latino and Asian, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. We are united by common values. We all want a better world for our children, and we want the best for our country. And we are committed to putting a Democrat back in the White House.

"And our nominee – our nominee will be stronger for having campaigned long and hard, building enthusiasm and excitement, hearing your stories and answering your questions. And I will work my heart out for the nominee of the Democratic Party to make sure we have a Democratic President. "

[ehandler]

I'll take your word for it that she did. She also has since gone on to say that hard working, white Americans support her more; and now that votes in Florida and Michigan (where Obama wasn't listed on the ballot!), states that she agreed to sanction for breaking Democratic party rules, should count. My point being, saying what you've quoted, and leaving it at that, might have been effective. Saying what you've quoted, and then contradicting it, and continuing to disparage the likely nominee, and continuing to exploit racial divisions, and continuing to try to subvert party agreements late in the game, don't help.
Just one man's opinion, though.

[allonfla]

I believe the author wants Hillary to denounce the racism that Obama has faced in this campaign just like her supporters are demanding that Obama denounce the sexism she has faced.

[cog1000]

Excellent post. But today I heard Sen. Clinton saying, "some say I should bow out gracefully­... but those people had a job--" and she was off on one of her campaign stump speeches. It doesn't seem like she is going to do the right thing any time soon. I had hoped she would: she is a pragmatist. But at least she has stopped outright attacks on Sen. Obama. Maybe she is just waiting till all the states have voted, and then she will put forth her best shot to convince superdeleg­ates... and if/when that doesn't work, maybe she really will keep her word and work her "butt off" to support Sen. Obama. I'm willing--still--to give her the benefit of the doubt despite her appalling campaign.

[paganmist]

But that's entirely too logical to be right.

[blaqntelligence]

I meant "Two Democratic presidential candidates­....."

[blaqntelligence]

Yeah, imagine that.
Two Democrats of distinction, unmatched class, and dignity.
Well, at least we have one.......

[RickO]

My girlfiend used to hate the music that I liked simply because it was what I liked and not something she brought to the relationship (I'm a life-long Zappa-freak and she's into Johnny Cash). I understand how she felt because mine is an acquired taste. But then one day she heard a Zappa version of a Johnny Cash tune (Ring of Fire) and it piqued her curiosity. She listened to more and realized that despite the persona Zappa is known for, he is one of the most brilliant musical minds of the 20th century. she is now a huge admirer.

My point is that people tend to hate what they don't yet like but given a chance, and perhaps a closer look, opinions can change and often do. Hillary and Obama are both very qualified and we're lucky to have been offered such a choice. Only one can win and it seems Obama is the one. Now's the time to give him a closer look and my guess is that you'll like what you see.

[allonfla]

"Again, another respondent was more succinct: "You're going to eat your words in the fall when 25% of Hillary's supporters shut down your candidate.­"

Evan, this statement scared me too, but it mostly ticked me off and then I had to ask myself, "are these people crazy?" I've read other posters say 50%. But, I have come to believe that this threat is overblown like many polls and pundits are. And I have always said that it is Senator Clinton's time to step in and do something about this mess. You, however, said it MUCH better.

Hillary are you taking notes?

[aht772e]

90% of the "lost" hillary votes would never have voted for a democrat in november in the first place.and, fairly or not, because of the demonization of the clintons (especially hillary ) over the past 16 years by right wing radio, many independants who would not support hillary WILL support another democrat (who does not have her perceived negatives) ove 4 mor eyears of insane republican corruption , theft and destructction of the constitution. I live in republican country in pa, and even here, no one admits to voting for a republican in the fall.