The Big Costs of Hillary's "Big Wins"

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton may have won three of four primaries last Tuesday, gaining needed momentum for her flagging campaign, but in the end the cost of these wins may prove too high.

First and foremost, is the fact that, despite the victories, she still cannot capture the nomination unless there is a party-splitting fight or equally damaging rule change.

After Super Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama proceeded to win 12 contests in a row, amassing an elected delegate total that Clinton cannot surpass. Before last Tuesday, Obama had won 24 state contests to Clinton's 11, and he led by 160 delegates. Clinton's three victories will only net her campaign an extra six delegates, reducing Obama's lead to a still insurmountable 154.

Political analysts, looking forward to the remaining 12 states to hold primaries and caucuses, argue that unless Clinton wins them all by an average of 65 percent (an impossible scenario), she cannot catch up. This, therefore, means that Obama will go to the convention in Denver with more elected delegates than Clinton, though not the outright majority needed to win the nomination.

Two options will then remain. One, of course, is that superdelegates will decide the winner. The danger here is that if the superdelegates vote to give the nomination to the second-place Clinton, the Democratic Party may well emerge from the convention divided, and with a wounded nominee.

Barack Obama has not only energized African Americans, but mobilized a movement of young people with a restored faith in politics. Along the way, he recruited tens of thousands of volunteers and received contributions from an unprecedented 1.1 million donors (most of them for $100 or less). His campaign bears many of the trademarks of a social movement. Because of this, many of those he has energized and mobilized will not simply follow a nominee whom they feel won a "fixed" contest, and represents "politics as usual."

Another party-splitting scenario proposed by the Clinton campaign, is their insistence on having delegates from Michigan and Florida seated at the convention. Michigan and Florida broke party rules, had their delegates canceled, and saw none of the candidates campaigning in either state. These elections were not real contests. Clinton won in Michigan because she was the only major candidate who remained on the ballot (the others having withdrawn their names); and she won in Florida largely because of name recognition, since Obama honored the party's pledge not to campaign in the state. Therefore, to reward both states' bad behavior would compromise the integrity of the election and result in a divided and possibly rancorous Democratic convention.

Nevertheless, most Democrats want the Florida and Michigan problems to be fixed -- but not in a manner that would have their non-sanctioned primaries decide the outcome of the convention. A number of options are currently being discussed, and it is hoped that this matter can be resolved before too long.

Another major reason why the costs of Clinton's victories may be too high has to do with the tactics they utilized to achieve them. Almost since the beginning of this campaign, Hillary Clinton, her husband (the former president) or campaign operatives, played many negative cards in an effort to slow Obama's growing momentum. They played the "Muslim card," the "race card," the "experience card," the "drug card," and the "gender card." None succeeded.

And so when, in the last two weeks, the Clinton campaign promised a stepped-up negative assault, it was not surprising to see them find still more cards to play. There was, for example: the "fear/security card" (with Clinton claiming that only she -- or her Republican opponent! -- had the experience to defend the country from a terrorist threat), or the "cynicism card" (with Clinton mocking Obama's political rhetoric), or the "scandal card," the "victim of unfair media card" or the "plagiarism card." All of these combined took a toll, not only on Barack Obama, but on the Democratic constituency.

The constant attacks did, at times, appear to throw the Obama campaign slightly off-kilter; but, more than that, they opened up and deepened some fissures within the Democratic Party itself. As a result, following primaries, it now appears that about one-fifth of those who voted for Barack Obama have been so angered by these negative tactics that they would be hard-pressed to support Clinton if she were the nominee. Similarly, Clinton has now succeeded in molding the attitudes of about one-fifth of her voters who now say that they will not now support Obama should he be the nominee.

The negative campaigning worked, but arguably will help Republicans more in November than it helped Hillary Clinton last Tuesday. If Senator Clinton's goal was to "hard-foul" and deliver a wounded Obama and battle-tested tactics to use against him to the Republicans, she succeeded.

A side note: an additional cost to be calculated in all of this has been the price paid by Senator Clinton's husband, the former President. Once revered by many Democrats, despite the series of scandals and "triangulations" that characterized his Administration, Bill Clinton today appears reduced to a campaign heavy and hatchet man. It is not at all becoming, and more than a little sad.

Comments

[JWLANDSCAPES]

Hillary has my vote and my respect. But I especially applaud all the hard work of volunteers for both candidates. This is where the "REAL" dialogue is happening. On the phone, on the streets, door to door. Hillary had a larger grassroots reaction to her call for help and people responded. The nastiness here at the puffington is an insult to every volunteer who are particpants at the most essential level of our democracy. This is a wonderful primary with two inspiring candidates. I agree to disagree and there is a tasteful way of doing that without resorting to name calling and drudging up baseless recycled accusations from the Republican smear machine.

I am personally mortified that supporters of either candidate would suggest blackmailing the superdelegates with petitions threatening a vote for Nader or a write-in come November if their candidate isn't the winnder. Both Obama and Clinton have earned the right to continue the dialogue into the rest of the states and continue drawing enthusiasm and excitement on both sides.

Arguments can be made to support both candidates claim that they carried the right states. If a fair conclusion to MI and FL isn't found, then the superdelegates will have no choice but to decide on which candidate carrried the right states to best be our party's nominee. I will respect their decision and am happy to sign a petition of support and nonviolence as that is what unity is about. Again, I am a Hillary supporter and she has my vote. This isn't about Hillary, this isn't about Obama, but rather about people losing their jobs, people losing their homes, people who need democrat in the White House.

[mrJJ]

After the so called loyalist party members dubbed the superdelegates make their decision as to who the Dem nominee for President will be for the General 08 election "We the peon voters" Indies, Newbies & Crossover voters will have a chance to have our say. But NOT until after these superdelegates vote as their rules dictate. ... for anyone and for any reason they decide. thats the rules so nothing more to be said about it.

So what happens after the convention... A few scenarios...

1 In the General vote FOR your states entire Dem Senate and Congressional seats.

2 Decide to vote AGAINST the Dem nominee by leaving the Presidential slot BLANK in Nov 08

3 Vote with your feet by not showing up to vote in Nov 08

4 Vote for the nominee just because thats the only choice you have been given

5 Most importantly vote FOR the candidate because this Candidate is YOUR choice.

I assure you Sen Obama being a loyal Dem party member will urge his supporters to toe the Democratic Party line... I am voting for a candidate for President of the United States... NOT a Party...I don't care about Party.

I am NOT a follow my party right or wrong voter..I'm not even a member ..It will be interesting to see how many Indies and newbie & crossover voters feel the same way.

On to this Convention... Lets see the loyal party democratic party superdelegates make their decision. We will then know if the Democratic Party elders are interested in having us turn out to vote for their hand picked candidate or not.

[uscitizen]

Yep, as far as I'm concerned, she blew it. I've seen all I need to see.

[sashby]

I agree with this disappointing assessment. I am one of the many Obama supporters that started out with a moderate affection for the Clintons and thought Hillary would be a good president. A woman president seemed also to be a step forward, however I would vote for her strictly on that basis. When Obama began speaking I was drawn strongly to his message, and after many more speeches, interviews and reading online, I am now a strong supporter - and for one reason: he is the first politician I've seen that I TRULY believe has integrity. He is a transformational candidate, and I believe he can deliver a social movement.

I am also completely and totally opposed to Hillary at this point. I believe that she's fundamentally dishonest and without integrity. It's extremely disappointing. She could have fought for the nomination honestly and if she didn't win, she have left with her head up high and a remarkable legacy between herself and her husband - a respected First Family that would have complemented any future Democratic President and provided a strong foundation, not only to fix the damaged caused by the GOP, but to carry this country to greater heights and accomplishments than anyone in my generation has even dreamed. They could have done this - if they'd been respectful and shown integrity.

By contrast, I am now prepared to protest at the Democratic convention if the Michigan and Florida delegates are seated, particularly without a revote. I am skeptical of a revote, as Hillary's been spinning this as a crusade "for the voters" of those states. I question her integrity on this point too: she signed an agreement, yet left her name on the Michigan ballot. This can only mean one thing: she never intended to honor that agreement, and was preparing for this divide and conquer strategy from the start. And now - she won Ohio, and may have planned the false "NAFTAgate" leak with PM Harper, sparking a diplomatic crisis so she could undermine the process. At the least she hasn't apologized for her (shall I give her the benefit of the doubt?) erroneous comments.

Perhaps they weren't errors. Perhaps it was just a lie used by an opportunist. Very sad.

[MauriceBendix]

Here! Here! My words exactly.

[alkamm]

Although I had no illusions about the Clintons' temperamental and moral disqualifications for another co-Presidency, my disenchantment has ebbed and flowed. I wasn't won over by the tears of New Hampshire, but her conciliatory sound with respect for Obama at the end of the debate made me have at least luke-warm affection for her.

Leaving her name on the ballot in Michigan was a remarkably cynical move, and we can't let that move stand. To balance their rules flouting, a caucus would be nice, whether she'd accept it or not. Well, she'd have to. The Clintons have spun the press around to accept their attacks on Obama and they've ignored the real gorilla in the room, the Clinton's finances and their failure to disclose them.

I agree that the Clintons might have won by taking the high road, but this whole idea that she's more experienced is laughable. If the Republicans were putting out this message, we'd have plenty of scorn for it, but somehow quite a few people used it to justify their dislike for Obama, for change, or maybe even for his ethnicity.

The whole world is watching. This time, the Democratic party will get it right and put the grandiose plans of the Clintons to a merciful end.

[DeCapeJack]

I am with many other Democrats that will not vote for Clinton in the general. No, I won't vote for McCain or Nader, but will WRITE-IN OBAMA. With her "me or no one else" scorched earthy strategy, Clinton does not deserve the presidency.

[Researchguy66]

When you get a chance, re-read what you wrote...the irony is striking.

[oshpd1]

The sad thing is Hillary Clinton feels she is above the Democratic Party. She does not care how she tears the party apart as long as she wins and gains more personal power. I read many of the posts and I agree with most of what is written but there seems to be one thing most take for granted. It is that Hillary cares about the Democratic Party, the United States, the Military personnel, and last the American people, she doesn't. She does not care what we have to say or what we think. We are below her, in her eyes. She only cares for one thing her personal power. Why else would she stay with Bill, she wants his political power connections. She scares me.

[batguano]

Excellent commentary James. I find myself in the 1/5 of Dems who will NOT sully my conscience and vote for McClinton no matter what after her recent actions. A breath of fresh air or nothing! With the exit of our best candidate on the issues IMO, John Edwards, I will support Obama as most likely to hold to values I respect and policies that are in the best interests of our nation. I believe that given the psychotic swings in her campaign tone and the ugly Rovian attacks and swiftboating filth over the last several weeks, that Clinton is NOT the candidate I can either support or that can win in November. Clinton's actions and reprehensible comments do indeed make her a divisive selfish "monster" and do grave harm to progressive hopes.

[Aroth30]

Zogby is right on especially when he discusses the fissure on both campaigns. It is obvious to me that my party, the democrats, will have an extremely tough time winning in November. I am becoming increasingly pessimistic each week with al the negative ads and attacks. Their is only one reason why, Mccain has a huge edge becuase Clinton supporters will not coalesce behind Obama and Obama supporters will surely not vote for Clinton. I am releived to see someone else besides me see this trend. Thanks Zogby for making that point, It helps me seem less "crazy" to my family and friends.

[Gmoney1]

And now the Clinton machine is going on to try to capture the nomination by hook or by crook - anything to win - now she trying to get votes by telling those who are considering voting for Obama vote for me and I'll make him my vp - she is ruthless and not likeable - she has attempted to dissipate the hopes of the young voters by diminishing words of exhilaration - this is why our young people get turned -- and they will walk away - and the democratic party and america will suffer for the next 12 years - but it's okay - Obama is young - he'll be around to fight another day because after the horrific mess either Clinton or McCain puts us through Obama will still be substantially younger than they and as energized -

[SamThornton]

Excellent analysis, Dr. Zogby. Unfortunately, I believe Senator Clinton will continue her negative attacks and, abetted by a cheering Corporate Media, will find a way to secure the nomination. She will then lose to Sen. McCain in a landslide.

The strategic consequences will not be confined to loss of the White House. It has to do with Sen. Clinton's coattails. She has none. It's not a fashion choice, it's a result of her own negatives.

The Democrats running for Congress will therefore have to run on their own abysmal record since the 2006 election, a record of perfidy unmatched in recent history. If Democrats maintain a majority in Congress with this double-whammy it will rank as the biggest miracle in American voter behavior since we began voting.

Of course, I'm not an expert and I could be wrong.

[Stanley]

Math is rational while stirring any negative feelings to win is emotional. Of course the delegate count will stand as fact of a popular vote by the current rules, but the negative emotional residue of the kitchen sink approach creates a wound that polarizes. The zealotry of hatred or love of the Clintons is truly amazing. Their ability to manipulate emotions and facts is at a level of artistry. However, it is also transparent to all but the true believers, who are reminiscent of the neocons that backed Bush like mind controlled automatons. While politics is a dirty game, we should be careful to not be more attracted to the dirt then the goal. We are more swayed by the visceral emotions than real leadership. Our country faces a world fighting it out for power in an economic battlefield and the weapon is energy. If Obama can reframe the debate on a super green economy initiative and bring Russia into the conversation with Iraq/Iran policy and stability in Africa in conjunction with a measured reallocation of military assets to best suit objectives over pride based on bad choices he would steal both Clinton and McCain's opportunity to go negative by leading in a positive and rational manner with a plan based on foreign policy success that enriches our domestic economy rather than enriching our enemies and antagonists. While Ohio elected Bush and now favors Clinton, and Florida continues to break rules and still wants to make Kings, it only shows the people in the other 48 unimportant states that there votes and voices matter more than ever.

[indie17]

Thank you Mr. Zogby. You have put the facts together for all to see.

Now, if only the MSM will quit making a false race of this monstrosity.

A fun little side note: If all of the superdelegates vote to match the state vote (e.g. all NY supers vote for Hillary, all IL supers vote for Obama, etc.), Obama comes out ahead in superdelegates. I am not suggesting that the supers have to vote this way, but it's a little interesting side point on the math.

For all the FL and MI voters, if we count the votes today, Obama is still ahead.

As for PA, Obama will regain whatever he loses there on May 3rd in IN and NC.

It's done, it's been done, it's so over. Clinton's ONLY hope is that the supers would overturn the election for her. This isn't going to happen.

[mrJJ]

That is why this primary race must continue on to the convention. Every State that has followed the rules must vote their slate of Dem nominees. At the convention the so called elite all knowing party faithfull superdelegates will cast their vote for the Dem nominee.

Then and only then can the supporters of each Dem candidate decide whether or not to bolt the convention...It is very important that these Super delegates be allowed to vote the way their rules stipulate... for anyone and for any reason they choose.

Come November the voters can leave their Presidential choice blank.. if they so desire. But most importantly they can vote FOR a Dem Senator or Congressional seat for their State...

I am not a card carrying follow the party right or wrong voter... I will reserve my decision to vote or not vote for the Presidential preference slot at the ballot booth in November. I will vote for dems on the rest of the ballot... Lets see the wisdom of these superdelegates as their votes will decide the ultimate fate of the fragile coalition thats called the Dem party.

[1dogs2]

This piece is spot on and articulates exactly what I have been arguing repeatedly on this site. Perhaps the Clinton camp will pay more attention to the analysis coming from a highly respected pollster.

[LoloZ]

This latest round of Clinton dirty tricks has convinced me that if she is the nominee i won't vote for her. Her McCain comment is despicable, and should be to all democrats. Her staff (PAID staff) have said worse things than Samantha Power, who was a VOLUNTEER for Obama. And she was gone from the campaign the same day because of Obama's intolerance for running a negative campaign . As we saw with the NAFTA issue in Ohio, it was Clinton who was in the wrong, yet she spun it 180 degrees and pinned it on Obama. She did that with the race card previously in SC. It's one thing after another, yet Obama stays on the high road and doesn't stoop to her level. She is damaging her party by trashing her opponent. There is good reason why Obama's supporters won't support Hillary Clinton in November