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

[msjentay]

Narcissist - that's the perfect word to describe the Clintons. I think the powers that be are failing us by letting this continue. Today I blame McCain’s 'political picnic' on Hillary; everyone agrees that he's been given a free ride because of the ongoing fight between dems. We could have wrapped up the whole election by now just running on the mistakes he's made in the past 2 weeks. If he wins the general election, then I'll shift the blame to the superdelegates and the political leaders in the democratic party who've all along had the power to stop this but didn't. Everyone knows the Clintons are playing games but for some reason (fear? not sure...) the people who can stop it won't. And it's not because they believe HRC is the better candidate; anyone's who's spent more than 6 weeks working closely with the Clintons I'm sure have the Clinton-hangover that we're all feeling right now.

[banjomike]

We are witnessing the struggle of one major American political party to select a candidate who will lead our country in the 21st Century, not replay late 20th. Which candidate is best prepared for this new century? The Republican, who is firmly rooted in policies over 40 years old? The Democrat bent on continuing the in-fighting and partisanship of the past 20 years? Or the other Democrat who is looking forward, not backward to the past?

Since 9/11, it is obvious that the 20th century's ways of doing things don't work. The Repubs won't face these challenges, so the Democratic fight is necessary. We have to allow it to play out.There has already been too much deadlock, stupid partisanship and indifference.

It is up to the Democratic party to re-define itself . Either we show we are tempered, strong, and ready to lead into the 21st Century, or we show that we're not up to the job.

Buck up, show some spine and see this through to the end... the voters have had enough of closed doors and secret wheelings and dealings. They want a President and a Congress who will get things done, and will show it in November.

If Democrats can't win the upcoming election handily, we don't deserve to be a political party. The Republicans are one step away from being as obsolete as the Whigs.

[spqesq]

"We are witnessing the struggle of one major American political party to select a candidate who will lead our country in the 21st Century, not replay late 20th." I believe we're watching a textbook narcissist on a rampage. Her sycophants are paid to handsomely to do it. The rest of us are totally powerless. It's up to the super D's to do the right thing.

[lizr]

Get this woman out of the race before she destroys the Party and guarantees a McCain victory.

Party Elders??
Are you listening???

[dkings123]

Hillary is not destroying anything and she is not the center of negativity that is implied in this opinion piece. Barack's negativity is more underhanded. He treats Hillary as some kind of joke (which is the thing that is laughable) and he uses his surrogates to lash out and distort the truth.

There is no reason to end it. Hillary has the experience, ideas, and toughness to be an excellent President. She is in a solid position with key pieces in place. More people are voting. People are still very engaged; 10 million alone listened to the PA debate . Go Hillary!

[michiganfan]

Spoken like a true PR drone.

[lavisiter]

Buck up and believe in your candidate!!!

[northeast73]

Only 53% of Clinton Suporters (in PA) said they will vote for Obama if he is nominated.

87% of Obama supporters said they will vote Clinton.



Superdelegates, are you listening?

[Pigliacci]

What is that, nomination by blackmail? "If you don't let me win, I'll take my ball and go home!"

[McFlipFlop]

Not according to CNN exit polls for PA.

22% of Clinton voters said they would either vote for McCain (13.5% of the 22%), or not vote (8.8% of the 22%).

Therefore, 78% of Clinton voters would vote for Obama.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#PADEM

[BigMike75]

Therin lies her mission. Only 53% of her supporters say they will vote for Obama because of the nature of the campaign she has run. Paint him as unelectable as possible(even gone as far as to say Mccain is more electable) so he can't win the nomination, or he will not get the support of her voter base in the general election. 87% of his supporters will vote for her because he has run a campaign, based on issues and has only gone negative when forced to by the Clinton playbook. She has broken so many party unwritten rules it's not funny, and has lost so much credibility.

[spqesq]

And the independents and disaffected R's that hate the Clintons?

[dirtystrat]

"Only 53% of Clinton Suporters (in PA) said they will vote for Obama if he is nominated."

That tells me that 53% of Clinton supporters (in PA) are brain dead. So lets see. The guy with the most votes, the most delegates and having won the most states gets told sorry but were going with the loser. Are you people serious. And these are the same people who rant how George Bush stole the election in Florida and now your ready to go down this road? Why are you so loyal to this woman who doesn't give a sh!t about you. It's all about her and Bill and the payback to all those contributions that Bill has been raking in. Wake Up and give Hillary the boot. The sooner the better. It may already be too late.

[dirtystrat]

"That tells me that 53% of Clinton supporters (in PA) are brain dead. "

Ooops. My math is off. That should be 47%

[TruthSpeaker]

Amen brother!

The only explanation for this behavior that makes any sense to me, is that she is on a mission for the "special interests" who fund puppets in both parties to ensure that one of their horses - either McCain or Clinton, wins. Hence her politics of personal destruction; Hillary is a Republican in drag.

Just look at her lies about NAFTA - at the time she held many events and meetings to sell it to labor and feminist groups, etc.. Now she tells us she was always against it. Either she was lying to those people then, or she's lying to us now. Either way, she's a liar and her actions promoted rampant globalization for the benefit of the wealthy few and helped devastate manufacturing jobs in the U.S.

[magen]

There's NO way for Hillary-ous to get more delegates than Barack without some kind of backroom deal.

In sports, if one team has more points, but the other team played really tough and well, the team with the most points still wins.

So far its 1724 Barack to 1589 Hillary-ous.

Ya gotta drag it out and keep losing to the bitter end, dragging us all down with ya, don't cha Hill???????

[northeast73]

In sports, if one team has more points, but the other team played really tough and well, the team with the most points still wins.

So far its 1724
==============

AND IN A GAME WHERE YOU NEED 2025 TO WIN, 1724 IS NOT WINNING.

[spqesq]

1589 is?

[northeast73]

Lets rephase your piece here a bit....

FIRST: The numbers are clear. Mr. Obama CANNOT hit the required number of delegates to secure the nomination before or by June 3rd.

SECOND: College kids, ultra libs, and blacks are super pumped for Obama, bu the rest of the democrats are not. Hillary clinton supporters are growing more and more angry each day because of people like YOU who want her to step aside for your messiah.

THIRD: "I am more experienced, so vote for me" is NOT THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION.

[michiganfan]

Wow!

How do you get oxygen when your head is buried so deeply in the sand?

[Pigliacci]

But she's not , Blanche, she's not!

[Rock81]

Let me break it down for you a bit:

FIRST: The numbers are clear that Mrs. Clinton CANNOT hit the required number of delegates AT ALL!

SECOND: Nobody has ever called Obama an messiah but you Clintonistas. People, whether they are Obama supporters or not are calling for her to drop out because she CANNOT win this nomination without a coup from the superdelegates.

THIRD:"I am more experienced, so vote for me" is NOT THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION. I agree. But "he's not a muslim..as far as I know", making up ties to farrakan and a former terrorist, calling obama an elitist, calling obama inexperienced, dismissing states that you don't win as unimportant QUALIFY AS THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION.

[Camel54]

No but insinuating her opponent is a Muslim certainly is the politics of personal destruction. So is taking the stance of Republicans on fear and guns to demean your opponent's position. So is lying about his NAFTA position and relationship with a foreign country while those in your own campaign are doing exactly what you're accusing your opponent of. So is telling the DNC you will abide by their rules while telling the people of FL the opposite; telling the people of Michigan the opposite. So is attacking your party rival while praising the Republican candidate. So is mocking his oratory like a 3rd grader would. So is attacking a kindergarten paper. So is demeaning his wins in southern states by associating those wins with the likes of Jesse Jackson. So is calling Richardson Judas because he supports your opponent. So is having a mountain of shady relationships over the years while trying to make one or two questionable relationships your opponent has as somehow unamerican.

[Trudie]

FIRST: Clinton has a much lesser chance of EVER hitting the required number of delegates, since it would almost certainly mean the superdelegates made a choice that disagreed with the choice of the voters, which would be incredibly politically risky for them and the party.

SECOND: Have you spoken to all "the rest of the Democrats"? Obama won most of the Midwest, which is hardly populated with only "college kids, ultra libs, and blacks." And stop with the stupid "messiah" comments. You're saying that at least half of registered Democrats are behaving as if we're in a cult. It's incredibly condescending. I don't think he's perfect, I just would prefer him as president.

THIRD: If "I am more experienced" were the only thing Hillary had ever said in this campaign, you'd be right. And she might actually be winning.

[SamuelBerry08]

Zogby refers to "the pathological self-destruction that so often follows from narcissistic behavior". Well, you didn't expect Hillary to lose like a man, did you?

[ConcernedAmerican]

Who in their right mind would try and tout votes received when your opponent wasn't even on the ballot? Especially, when you're on record as saying the MI votes wouldn't and shouldn't count?

Seriously, that is extremely lame....and desparate (and kinda embarrasing).

[VernonC]

I agree with Zogby that Clinton should give up, she's praying that something will happen to Obama or that something, anything, will turn up to disqualify him. Narcissistic barely describes her, the gall of the woman is beyond description. I disagree with his statement that "Her tragic flaw is her belief that only she is capable of leading." That implies that she is interested in being a leader as one normally hopes of a high political office holder, nothing could be further from the truth, her interest in the presidency is the power and pelf that comes with it. When she speaks of her experience in the White House as preparing her for the office, it's likely she saw opportunities missed because of his misquided predilections and figures another term or two for them in the White House will open even more doors for them on their pursuit of riches and power. They became multi-millionaires after his two terms and she envisions much more, a billion is within reach, with a presidency of her own.

[MaureenSharkey]

Hillary is going to most likely win the nomination.

The "count every vote" democrats can't become hypocrits about the Florida vote.

Hillary is ahead in the popular vote.

There have been 5 times in the last 100 years that the one who came in to the convention with less delegates---like 325 less---came out the nominee.

Hillary will probably take Indiana.

You'll see.

[BKLN]

Hillary ahead in the popular vote? Really? Or just because she said so? Let's look:

Without MI/FL:
Obama: 14,447,566
Clinton: 13,965,192

With FL, but NOT MI:
Obama: 15,016,607
Clinton: 14,822,400

With MI/FL, including "uncommitted" for Obama:
Obama: 15,254,369
Clinton: 15,150,551

With MI/FL, giving Obama 0 in MI and Clinton 328,000-plus (the only metric which gives her a lead in popular votes):
Clinton: 15,150,551
Obama: 15,016,607

[spqesq]

Billary doesn't like "actual" numbers.

[vallon]

And if she doesn't win, the Clinton enablers will throw a fit and vote for McCain. Right?

[spqesq]

After the last 20 years watching Clinton, McCain and Bush, I'm not really sure there's a difference.

[valleygent]

Yes Maureen...and the tooth fairy will be on hand to annoint the fair princess to her rightful place as queen of America.

God help the United States of America! Its people have become hallucinatory.

[slc20]

Hillary wants to overthrow the primary and caucus results, disenfranchising every single person who voted, so you have NO RIGHT to boohoo about Florida.

[lizr]

then Mccain will win because I will stay home and so will everyone I know.

[Pigliacci]

Yes, you and everyone you know are the swing vote that will throw the election to McCain. Wow!

[spqesq]

Me too.

[myskylark]

You leave out some important reasons that no matter what the DNC or the super-delegates do, an Obama nomination will be viewed as illegitimate by many Clinton supporters.

First, the number of caucus states in the Democratic process is obscene. Caucuses are by their very nature undemocratic, and in the Democratic Party version they are completely unacceptable, i.e.: the denial of secret ballots, the refusal to publish raw vote numbers, the reapportionment of votes by weighting the votes of each district based on the districts voting pattern from prior elections. .

Second, even the primary system in the Democratic Party is counter-productive. The number of delegates awarded to each state and within each state bears no relationship to the number of electors each state has in the Electoral College and the general election. . If the DNC had used rules similar to rules in the Republican primaries Hillary Clinton would have already won the Democratic nomination.

Third, disenfranchising the Democratic voters of Florida and Michigan is a terrible act. No one should punish the voters because of the transgressions of officials.

Fourth, the reason for creating the super-delegates was the party professionals would serve as a firewall in case the voters chose a candidate that would not have a good chance of winning in the general election.

If the party is seen to stop the process before all the states and Puerto Rico have voted, even more Clinton supporters will bolt in November.

[BKLN]

It's funny how caucuses were just fine with everybody (including Clinton herself) until she started losing.

[northeast73]

If the party is seen to stop the process before all the states and Puerto Rico have voted, even more Clinton supporters will bolt in November.
=========

bingo!

[Squirtapotamus]

Clinton supporters will bolt? Well, OK. They act like Republicans anyway with all the swiftboat smear tactics and fear-mongering. Might as well let you go to the party that best fits their lack of integrity. Hillary's campaign has all been part of the right-wing conspiracy to destroy the Democratic party. It's worked.

[beeftip]

Obamabots will likewise view a Clinton nomination as illegitimate.

A Clinton nomination can only be achieved by a convention floor fight or mass exodus of superdelegates to the Clinton camp. Because it's the Clintons, this will be viewed as orchestrated or manipulated.

Your point is moot. The democratic party is damaged regardless of who wins the nomination.

[laocoon]

I have no problem with her running. I do have with her tactics. Go after McCain. She and Obama could be double teaming him now. Instead he is being given campaign ads for Nov.

[Obama2008]

Amen

[HGS111]

Ok! here's the deal .... pundits ( talking heads) keep asking how come he ( Obama ) can't put her (Clinton) away even with all of his money he must be unelectable. So regarding electability how come he's even in this at all. I mean he's running against the biggest name in politics (World Wide in fact) The Clinton's haven't paid rent in nearly 30 years give or take a few. Obama was completely unheard two years ago. He managed to take her 20 plus percentage point advantage and close it to single digits in Pa. running against a former first lady a former popular president, a popular governor and two big city mayors with huge machines to carry her and a big name neighboring state governor to add additional support. So let's take another look at electability. By the way all this money is coming from somewhere. Could it possibly be vote by checkbook? I rest my case.

[spqesq]

Ditto.

[wrensis]

First I would like to point out your pathetic poll results. Not even close...once.
Florida and Michigan don't count. They had primaries too early. Now you want to disenfranchise the remaining states because they waited. Viable candiddates like Biden, Dodd and Edwards were swept aside by small number of states.
You are tired of watching the democratic process you want it to end. When did this become "about you" ? We are electing a president despite MSM and the polls designed to mislead.
Please sit quietly in your seat, stop putting out bogus polls and wait for the process to work. It might not be the best way to do this but it has worked for years without your help.