End It Now

There is a bizarre, and even tragic, unreality to the continuing drama playing out in the Democratic primary. Partly due to the seven-week gap between the first 42 contests and this week's match-up in Pennsylvania, and partly due to the tenacity and temerity of the Clintons, this election is being presented as close and not yet over.

But it is over.

Dragging it out any longer only serves to indulge the Clintons' narcissism, while damaging the Democratic party's chances for victory in November. A few observations:

First: The numbers are clear: Clinton cannot surpass Obama's elected delegate total in the contests that remain. It is not unlike a fifty-two lap motor race. In the first forty-three laps, Obama has passed her twice, and built up a lead that is insurmountable. Now, in the midst of the 44th lap, it only appears to be close, but it is not. The only way she could possibly win is either by changing the rules of the game in Michigan and Florida, or convincing a substantial number of superdelegates to cast their ballots for her -- overturning the results of the elections to date. Either of these two scenarios would cause a devastating upheaval within the party, bringing on what I call a "1968 moment."

Second: There is no doubt that the Democratic base has been energized by this election. The record number of voters, volunteers, and contributors point to this fact. But, at the same time, it is important to acknowledge that real damage is occurring within the Democratic constituency. Polls that show a growing fracture within the Democratic coalition should be read as cautionary signs to be heeded. Those Beltway pundits and party regulars who say "Don't worry, after the convention, Democrats will come together" are out of touch with the real damage that has been done in the minds of voters on both sides of the divide.

Early on, Senator Obama spoke eloquently about the degree to which cynicism had infected our politics, resulting in voters no longer believing what politicians have to say. Only those who did not understand his message, or heed the lesson he sought to teach, can believe that Hillary and Bill Clinton will be easily able to undo the negativity they have created. Some voters will surely ask, "Were they lying then, or are they lying now?"

Third: There is no doubt that Senator Clinton is a talented and an extraordinarily intelligent person. Her tragic flaw is her belief that only she is capable of leading. It is this that has caused her to engage in an effort to demean her opponent and engage in the kind of campaign that she once decried as "the politics of personal destruction." It is this that I call her narcissism, and the degree to which it has damaged not only the Democratic chances in November, but also her reputation -- defines the pathological self-destruction that so often follows from narcissistic behavior

This has gone on too long, and should end now. Former President Clinton has argued that all the states should be given a chance to vote. They should have that chance. And, if this campaign were focused on issues and a debate over competing visions of leadership, I would say, "Let it continue."

But this has not been the case. Given the behavior of the Clinton campaign to date, and the expectation this behavior will continue, I believe that prolonging this agony will only create deeper division. For this reason, it should end now.

My fellow superdelegates should wait no longer. As party leaders, we are uniquely positioned, and have the responsibility, to speak out. Indecision only serves to enable bad behavior. It is time for us to either demand that the behavior change, or act to end this now.

Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary results

Comments

[ColHogan]

No, Mr Zogby, it won't do any good to end the campaign season now. Once begun, the cycle needs to play itself out according to the rules selected prior to the beginning. What was wrong was to start the campaign cycle the minute the voting booths closed their doors in November 2006. The Presidential campaign season should not have begun until January of this year.

[CGrace]

Well said, thank you.

[gotsomerice]

I think the reason that Hillary won PA is:

Hillary = Devil you know
Obama = Devil you don't know

People don't like the unknown. It's just human nature. Most people still don't know who he is. If Obama going to win in November. He has to fix this asap. Otherwise history going to repeat itself in November.

[AvasTiaJeanne]

I'm sorry, but if you don't know who Sen. Obama is, what he stands for, and what his policies are by now, you must be living under a rock. I seriously doubt that anyone who is "undecided" or "doesn't know" Sen. Obama should be entrusted to vote at all.

There is an ignorance in this country that is astounding. We are in the middle of one of the most turbulent and damaging times in our country, and people still "don't know" or are "undecided" about who they will vote for. This, despite the 24 hour news cycle and the plethora of information sources on the internet.

This ignorance leads to people asking insipid questions such as in the PA debate, when one PA rseident asked Sen. Obama why he doesn't wear a flag pin on his lapel.

I am holding my breath throughout this ordeal, waiting (but not very optimistic) to see if common sense and reason will prevail!

[gotsomerice]

The fact is their votes count as much as our. If Obama wants to unify he has to reach out. There's no other way around this. I am very scare in November. I am not hopeful at all.

[Jaradan]

"He has to fix this asap. "

He can't force people to turn on their TVs, radios, or crack open a book. People who are living under the proverbial rock in regards to politics are unreachable. There are still people out there who believe he's a Muslim - even after the Rev. Wright controversy. Those people are a lost cause.

[JanP]

I think he has a soft heart for Islam, having been raised around Muslims during his early life. (This is not a criticism or an endorsement - just a statement.)

I think he is a fraud about relgion. He proudly proclaims his belonging to an activist church for 20 years, states how religion AND Pastor Wright have helped him make moral decisions. Then he criticizes small town people for "clinging to their religion".

For his ardent supporters, he CAN have it both ways. for the rest of us, it just raises questions about who he is.

[koolwoman]

You are so right. There is a lot we don't know about Obama. . Hillary has had every shred of her life revealed, gloated over, criticized and publicized.. No secrets there. Her enemies probably know what size she wears, and what she eats and drinks. Leave her alone. The more you pile on, the more we women will write another check.

[Nancyann]

AS A WOMAN, YOU ARE ONLY MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR A WOMAN TO BE IN THE WHITE HOUSE. HILLARY CLINTO IS A DISGRACE TO HER SEX. SHE STAYS SORT OF MARRIED TO A SERIAL ADULTERER TO GAIN POWER. SHE CANNOT BE RESPECTED BECAUSE SHE IS A FRAUD AND A LIAR.

IT IS A BEUATIFUL THING TO WATCH HER AND HER SORT OF HUSBAND IMPLODING !!!!!

[Uberbah]

Yes, the Clintons were overly vetted by the right wing in the 90's. But she's handing new stuff to them all the time: Tuzla and her attempts to take credit for SCHIP, FMLA, and opposing NAFTA.

The right wing opposes Hillary because her last name is Clinton. Democrats oppose Hillary because of her actions, period.

It's too bad she never fought Bush a tenth as much as she's fighting Obama right now.

[nellie]

Thank you, Mr. Zogby.

[DocMobley]

This democratic primary election season has been historic in many ways including once unimaginable numbers of first timer voters, grassroots supporters, ordinary Americans fueling the campaigns, and millions of Americans finally believing they can make a difference "inside the government."

The good news is that the leaders of the Democratic Party has the destiny of the party in their hands with unparalleled momentum and enthusiasm. The bad news is that they can "end the Democratic Party as we know it" by disenfranchising and overturning the "will of the majority." Either outcome will be historic!

[Notapathetic]

Has anyone noticed that in the last thirty days the Republicans and the Clintons and "unknown" right-wing 527 organizations have teamed up to stop Obama? Notice that McCain and other Republicans (even media talking heads) NEVER attack Hillary and ALWAYS attack Obama?Hillary is only fighting against Obama but Obama is having to fight about a half-dozen opponents at the same time.

Think about it: Either McCain or Clinton will tend to keep the contracts worth millions and millions and millions of dollars going to the established companies. The financial giants know they will continue to get huge amounts of government money if either Hillary or McCain is elected.

But Obama is a wild card and the established powers don't know what he might mean to them. Even a small government contract is worth thousands of millions of dollars and they have decided enough is enough of the unknown quantity. They have to stop Obama now!

The strategy from now until Indiana is for Hillary to secretly team up with the right-wing (like McCain, Limbaugh, the people behind the ad in NC, the Scaife newspaper guy, etc.). This is her longshot chance, and she is happy to get in bed with ANYONE if it means success.

[koolwoman]

That is a bunch of BS. Seen any flying saucers lately?

[legalclubs]

I was ininitially for Hillary Clinton, but assuming Obama takes down more states, more popular vote, and more elected delegates is would be a riduculas betrayal of the democratic process if the Democratic party bigwigs refused his nomination by superdelegate votes. Why did we even vote? Now, I can't possibly see Obama willingly agreeing to accept Hillary Clinton as his VP when she has either directly or indirectly attacked him as unqualified, unpatriotic, and has her surragates race-batting. Even if we remove the fact that she is probably personally unlikable to Obama, how would it work in debates with McCain when Obama is asked about the fact that the bottom of his ticket said just a few months prior that McCain was qualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief but Obama was not? A better payoff for Clinton would be a secret deal to place her in the Supreme Court when the first slot opens under an Obama Administration. Besides, how much would that piss off the right to see Obama as President and Hillary on the Supreme Court for life.

[MouthFountain]

Boycott Clinton 08!

We have the power. It is simply to ignore her and her irrational supporters. This is not a race. No Laps. It is more like two balls dropped from the top of a building. Gravity is the only force, since we all know that there are no barriers in the way. Obama ran the campaign that I wish both Gore and Kerry ran. He will make an excellent president!

It is time to use our minds. Leave her alone. Do not comment on her stories. End it.

[ShawnMichel]

Amen.

[BarryChamplain]

1. With regard to the auto race analogy: it's as if along came the 52nd lap, and the judges announced that, "for the good of the race", they were simply going to declare Hillary the winner anyway;

2. Here's another effect that I haven't heard anyone suggest:

If Hillary twists enough arms and clearly subverts the will of the Democratic majority in 2008, that old, reliable percentage of Black Dem voters will shock the pundits on the morning after Election Day, when John McCain accepts victory. Because, for the first time in history, IT'S NOT GONNA BE THERE.

The Black Democratic vote is always taken for granted. Only his time, it has finally printed with the Black community that not only is this the case, but it's as plain as day that now they've got some real skin in the game (and guess what color that skin is).

There has never been a time when Black folks haven't gotten the wrong end of the stick. Only THIS time it's different; if it's the Democratic Party who messes with the democratic process, it's going to deny them the extremely real possibility of the first Black president... I assure you, they will feel no peer pressure to "pull together for the team".

Meaning, Hillary loses in a landslide, and with its reliable minority support vanished, the Democratic Party collapses.

[rototty]

I completely agree with you. I'm an African American woman and If the super delegates take this away from Obama and give it to Clinton I will be staying home in November.

[TexasMom]

I'm an anglo woman with African American kids. I'll vote for the down-tickets to increase a majority for the House and Senate but if the superdelegates take it away from Obama and give it to Clinton that top slot on my ballot stays blank.

I won't reward their "where they gonna go" philosophy with any kind of vote for her and I'll give the money I've been giving to the Obama campaign to the House and Senate campaigns as long as none of it gets used for Clinton.

[Kebbi101]

Barry the people that you are describing dont seserve there chance to vote, alon with the women who are voting for Hillary just becuase she is a woman. If you are an african American voting for Barack because he is black you shouldnt vote. I truly believe the only reason Barack is ahead is because of black people voting for him just because he is black, and stupid kids ( and I mean only the stupid ones ) voting for popularity. Notice that the party faithfuls like the older people have stuck with Hillary because they have been around the block a few times, but there are older people that vote for Obama and I dont want to take anything away from him but most of the older ones supporting him are activists and I dont want to try to define activists because I dont want to insult anyone that is not what I am here for. Read next post

[rototty]

I feel this way because Obama has won for all intents and purposes not because we both happen to be African American. If this were happening to any other politician I would feel the same way. My issue is that everyone is focused on how Obama is losing the White working class vote instead of Clinton losing the African American vote. Can a Democrat win without these two groups?

[fiona2]

I regret I must isagree with you. I think the Clintons are vey savvy politically and would not risk finacial turmoil, future position, and reputation merely for ego. So that leads me to believe we don 't have the full story and the turth is what we should seek, not opinions..For the record I am advocating a dream ticket, It is the sureset way to ensure victory and quality.

[combatveteran]

dream is right

[MontyCello]

nightmare

[britethere]

If Obama puts her on the ticket first he will also have to deal with Bill...second he will have to hier a food taster

[gopindrag]

"Turth," I like that word. Even better is turthiness.

[mbrlr]

It's called ego and it trumps political savvy. She thought it was hers with no significant opposition and, I'll be ****ed, there was significant and superior opposition. It should end now, graciously and with an eye towards November, with an acknowledgment that the VP slot, if ever an option, isn't an option now.

[fiona2]

Why then does Clinton stay it? I have a hard time believing she would risk financial turmoil, reputation, and future position merely for the sake of ego? Something doesn't add up here..The Clintons are very savvy, and it makes me wonder what we ar missing. For the record, I am only voting if both Clinton and Obama are on the same ticket, because it is the only way to ensure everyone's honesty, sincerity. and qualification..besides, it will force us all to compromise and unify.

[davesideas]

Clinton has insured that that will never happen; she made it personal

[MontyCello]

Are they that savvy or is that just our projection on them? To paraphrase Forrest Gump
self-absorbed is as self-absorbed does. History will judge. For my money I think she
realizes this is her only shot at the prize. At what price? Sometimes things are as they
appear. As for myself, I don't care for what I see.

[legalclubs]

She could still win if the Superdelegates swing her way by an overwelming majority and in direct opposition to the elected delegates as determined by the actual elections. In theory, we could find out something so damaging about Obama that he couldn't possibly win and the superdelegates could "save" us from our bad decision. This appears unlikely because Hillary's "opposition research" would have uncovered this long ago, but she could always hope for some Obama disasator. On the other hand, she could promise to buy off enough of those superdelegates with "campaign contributions" (unbelievably this is legal) from some of the $100 million she pulled in over the last 8 years. Good to see somebody did well during the Bush administration.

[bobsmith]

"For the record, I am only voting if both Clinton and Obama are on the same ticket, because ... it will force us all to compromise and unify."

Clinton on the ticket isn't unifying... it's selling out. She's a Republican-lite, war-mongering, corporate-owned, faux Democrat. No true Democrat would willingly buy into her Republican-lite ideology for the sake of "unifying" or "compromising". If it's unity you seek, why not just become a Republican?

Do you stand for nothing?

[BlondieM]

Amen, bobsmith.

[Kebbi101]

bobsmith I stand for something, I want Clinton to win because I think that Obama can not do what he says, he has no track record of doing it. The only thing he has a track record of being is a state leg. who had dealings with a scumbag real estate person. He was a Co-Sponsor to a bill that stopped law makers from sitting down while they ate lunch with lobbyist. Oh and this, he sat in a church for 20 years and listened to his pastor put these very Anti-American comments out. Not saying Clinton doesnt have a whole lot of baggage going on but hers is out there, we still dont know the full extent of his unity with people that might not be to good. That said if nothing worst comes out about Obama I will vote for him if he wins.

[sherylsworld]

Just in, Hillary already lied about the amount of debt she had 15.3 million$

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/04/clinton_debt_la.html

"An FEC representative tells us Clinton's debt to herself, even if she won't be paying it back, should be lumped in with the campaign's debts to others on the first page of the monthly filings, not just listed deeper within her disclosure forms "

"Including the loan would put her debt as of March 30 at $15.3 million, the nonpartisan group said."

I am sure she is lying about the 10 millions, even so she is still down 5 million$ after you count the 10 million $

[Timma]

Hillary needs to bow out now - there is no should about it. Time is passed for niceties. Clinton needs to get out and let the process continue unhindered. Obama is the clear front runner. He's more than proved his worthiness through skillful strategic planning, coalition building, having real experience where it counts, and most of all recognizing the signs of the times.

Clinton represents everything wrong with the system. She won PA with non-college educated white elderly people. That's hardly the coming demographic. And that's hardly who we need running the country. If not then McCain's age should be moot. The reason younger voters are excited about Obama is because he understands that they must now step up into the ranks. They need to have their voice in government. They take Obama seriously because he hears their and everyone's concern for the future of the world. he's a serious politiian with a verey keen sense of what is needed now.

[timinhi]

Mr. Zogby--
You are a professional pollster. I am an attorney. In my profession, we are held to extreme defined ethical and moral standards. I am unaware if pollsters, as a group, have any such standards or guidelines. Common sense however, leads me to believe that a pollster, if he is to be given even a shred of credibility, should remain neutral, unbiased and detached from the issues or candidates he is polling on. You obviously haven't maintained or exhibited such neutrality, as evidenced by this post. As such, in my opinion, you are not to be granted any credibility, and you have acted appallingly unprofessionally. This post is a disgrace to your profession and taints all pollsters. If there IS some professional organization or "guild" or whatever that governs the actions and behavior of pollsters, your membership in that organization should be revoked.

[thesimulacra]

Oh, come off it. He wrote this article in his capacity as a superdelegate, it's his right. Zogby International (which is run not by James, but his brother John) has had the most accurate national polling data of any other polling service in the last 20 years. You don't get that kind of accuracy by engaging in unethical behavior. James Zogby has every right to speak his mind as a person. You think he's the only pollster who has political opinions? Get off your high horse.

[MouthFountain]

Thank you for clarifying that!

Boycott Clinton 08!

[mikekev58]

I'm not a lawyer or a pollster, but as soon as I read the tease on HuffPos home page, I had the same reaction. How can Zogby call for an end to something that he's suppose to be neutral about?
I sure will view the Zogby polls with a good deal of skepticism in the future.

[MouthFountain]

It is only Zogby at Zogby Inc.

There can be only one!

[combatveteran]

As an attorney you are held to extreme ethical and moral standards. What planet are you living on?

[whatsmyname]

ETHICS AND ATTORNEY? IN THE SAME SENTENCE? OBJECTION! YOU HAVE BEEN LIVING TOO LONG IN A NON-CIVILIAN WORLD; ETHICS, FOR STARTERS IS THEE ONE PART OF THE EXAM LAW STUDENTS (IN THIS COUNTRY) FAIL TIME AND TIME AGAIN. SOME HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO TAKE IT 7 AND 8 TIMES BEFORE PASSING. SO, CVET, DOES THAT TELL YOU ANYTHING? AND, BY THE WAY WHO ENFORCES THESE ETHICS AND MORAL STANDARDS? AND DON'T COUNT THE WEASEL AS BEING THE GUARD OF RECORD FOR THE CHICKEN HOUSE, OK? CARRY ON.

[whatsmyname]

WHAT EVER EVER HAPPENED TO THE ATTORNIES WITH GUTS? WHEN THE F.LEE BAILEYS OF THE WORLD OR THE SAM IRVINS OF THE GLOBE DIED OFF, NOBODY REPLACED THEM. IT IS ALMOST LIKE THE ONES NOW ARE ALL SCARED OF THEIR OWN SHADOW BECAUSE THEY SIT AND WATCH OTHER LAWYERS AND JUDGES BECOME CROOKED, WHORE CHASING LIARS THAT USUALLY END UP IN POLITICS -ONE WAY OR ANOTHER INSTEAD OF CHALLENGING. IT'S NOW JUST A GREED BASED SOCIETY WITH NO INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY OR FAIRNESS TO IT AT ALL.... AND THAT IS A SAD COMMENTARY THAT BILL CLINTON STARTED THEN HANDED THE OARS OVER TO DUBYA (HIS PAL) AND, ALL YOU CAN SAY IS, SO? IS THAT YOUR FINAL ANSWER?

[davesideas]

blah, blah, blah...

[MouthFountain]

Yes. If he is personally conducting the polls. They might be called push polling in that instance. Check the other front page stories. Would you like to revoke Clinton's advisors credential as well?

Boycott Clinton 08!

[caliguy]

First, the DNC decides that it will discount the votes of Florida and Michigan because their elections were too early. Now, even though neither nominee has reached the necessary pledged delegate majority, the DNC wants to discount the votes of Indiana, North Carolina, West Virgina, Kentucky, Oregon, Guam, Puerto Rico (and two states I can remember right now) because their elections are too late,

And now, this arrogant and pompous Zogby guy decides that it isn't enough that he has the ability to cast a decisive and disproportionate vote--even though most of us have never heard of him and he has never been elected by anyone, anywhere--but he wants to be king-maker as well. He says, "My fellow superdelegates should wait no longer. As party leaders, we are uniquely positioned, and have the responsibility, to speak out." Unbelievable.

The super-delegates will decide this nomination as it turns out, but regardless of which candidate any person supports, it is a dangerous and destructive thing to rely upon the super-delegates.

Each individual super-delegate should decide for himself or herself when and for whom to declare their support. If, after the primary elections are over, the nominee is still not decided, the DNC can move quickly to get the remaining super-delegates to state their preference and avoid a floor fight at the convention. Anything less, at this point, is disastrous.

[SpinCycleRadio]

If Clinton won't quit running against Obama then Obama should stop running against Clinton.

Obama validates the notion that Clinton still has a chance. Instead he should say. "The difference in elected delegates at this point is unbeatable so it is time to turn to the true challenge facing the Democratic Party, defeating John McCain.

Because lets face it, the 'Big State' argument is bogus, so the only real doubt that Clinton can raise is this notion that he is less 'electable'. And no quantity of talk about Clinton can address that issue.

So Obama should instead sit down with his writers and create a new speech on the subject "Why John McCain cannot be allowed to become president". Not necessarily negative per se, but a compelling rundown of all the ways McCain has promised to continue the disaster of the Bush years and all the ultraconservative votes he has taken over the years.. He should then fill a college arena and give the speech to the kind of response that we know he is capable of generating. That would kill the electability doubts about him vs McCain.

[davesideas]

very good point; I agree completely...get out of the Clinton loop; stop playing their made-up game; and begin the contest against McCain...make the Clintons irrelevant...

[BarryChamplain]

Shorter SpinCycle (if I understand you correctly):

Hillary will bring the party crashing down in flames before ever giving up. So, to stop this horrible thing from happening, and to save Hillary from herself, Obama needs to take the high road and graciously give up his ambitions for the presidency.





Of course, the other thing Democrats can do is simply not allow her to crash the party in flames... that'd work too...

[caliguy]

It's not that simple. If a candidate hasn't reached the magic number based on the delegate allocation process in the primaries, then the super-delegates decide. Many of the super-delegates are elected officials, so they are going to necessarily take in to account the popular vote, the winner in their own state, etc. However, many of the super-delegates are appointed party-hacks who have benefited from a patronage system of politics, and they aren't necessarily accountable to anyone. All of a sudden, t these super-delegates, many of whom we've never heard of until now, will be in a position to decide the nominee. If they endorse now, they will be subject to intense scrutiny. People will rightly ask, how and why is this person a super-delegate? (I wondered exactly that when I found out that Nancy Pelosi's daughter is a superdelegate.) There is not a big possibility of a real game-changer in any of the remaining primaries. The only real game-changer at this point is the remaining group of undeclared superdelegates. And it would be a mistake to assume that the super-delegates as a whole will only consider the popular vote or the current delegate count because 1) they don't have to and 2) as my mama used to say, "You gotta go home from the dance with the one who brung you,"

[MouthFountain]

Boycott Clinton 08!

[Computer Geek]

That would really p*** her off! Then she would probably turn into Joan Crawford ('No more wire hangers!'). I have this minds-eye of her stomping her feet and saying 'I will NOT be ignored'. Perhaps we/he should just ignore her until she spontaneously combusts and then we could all have a weeny roast and 'smores.

[mskttylttr]

LOVE the imagery here! Thanks!