iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Controversy, Coronation and the Clintons at the Convention


This is supposed to be a convention honoring Barack Obama for winning the most delegates and for making it official that the senator from Illinois is the Democratic candidate for president.

Conventions are not set up to appease the losing candidates but to have a "coronation" and bestow the crown on the new head of the Democratic Party. The new head of the Democratic Party is Barack Obama. So why, once again, are the Clintons' being talked about almost more than the man who will be the nominee of the party?

Why in the world should Hillary Clinton have her name put in nomination for president other than for her own ego and the other huge ego of her husband. This will not unify the convention. It will have the opposite effect and will split the convention and take the spotlight away from Obama and put it back on the Clintons.

Why should the Clintons be allowed to speak on two separate nights on prime time television? I would put them both on at 3 o'clock in the afternoon on Monday, August 25th, the first day of the convention, and then say goodbye to both of them and move on with the business of the convention, which is officially choosing the presidential and vice-presidential candidates of the party.

In politics, as in other parts of our lives, there are winners and losers. The winners bask in the spotlight and the losers move on to other endeavors. Having Hillary speak in prime time and having her name placed in nomination for president are both big mistakes.

Having just finished teaching a graduate course on the History of Political Conventions at Johns Hopkins University last night, I find that conventions are emotional affairs. Putting the senator from New York's name into nomination risks having a stampede of yelling and demonstrations that could force some unknown consequences to happen -- giving her a leg up for VP if the VP candidate has not yet been chosen -- or some other event that is not needed by Obama.

Having her name put in nomination also takes the spotlight away from the Democratic vice-presidential candidate who will need as much national television exposure as he or she can get. The Clintons will be stealing time away from the country getting to know the vice-presidential candidate better.

Obama's theme is change and having Bill Clinton talk in prime time reminds the voters of the past and not of the future. The Clintons do not represent change, but rather the status quo and the past.

Certainly a two-term former Democratic president should be allowed to speak, but put him on the first day of the convention. We know he won't talk much about Obama and the future but will talk about his favorite topic -- himself. He will talk about his administrations and how well the country was doing then. On economic issues and certainly in foreign policy, times were better, but we don't vote for what happened in the past -- we vote for what we hope will happen in the future.

Conventions stopped being controversial decades ago and the Obama team needs to show that they are in charge of the convention from the opening night. Having the Clintons dominate the news for two of the four nights in Denver is not good for the party.

We all know Hillary ran for president. It will do absolutely nothing for her place in history to have her name put in nomination. It is a bad idea that will take attention away from Obama and, once again, put the spotlight back on the Clintons.

This might make the Clintons happy but it will do nothing to advance the cause of putting Obama into the White House. Conventions are to be controlled by the winning candidate. They are not for making losing candidates feel better or for the losing candidates' followers to feel better. Forget all this psychological mumble jumble about catharsis for the Clinton camp and get back to politics.

Conventions, which are basically parties for the party, still have certain functions to perform and holding the hand of the losing candidate is not one that I have found mentioned in history.

Obama would look stronger and more forceful if he had not agreed to let Hillary's name be put into nomination. Obama and his vice-presidential choice should be 100% of the news out of Denver. Hillary lost to Obama fair and square and her husband is no longer president. It is time to move on.

Let the Clintons talk Monday afternoon -- the first day of the convention -- and then forget them and start praising Obama and his running mate. Goodbye Clintons -- move offstage and make room for Obama to assert his control of the party!

This is a winning ticket for November.

This is supposed to be a convention honoring Barack Obama for winning the most delegates and for making it official that the senator from Illinois is the Democratic candidate for president. Conventio...
This is supposed to be a convention honoring Barack Obama for winning the most delegates and for making it official that the senator from Illinois is the Democratic candidate for president. Conventio...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 46
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
02:07 AM on 08/18/2008
Actually I think it's pretty smart of Obama. What Hill and Bill crave is attention---being center stage and having a lot of people watching them. Obama is giving this to them....like a big bag of candy to a screaming toddler...and hopes they'll be glutted and then maybe they'll take a really long nap.
12:20 PM on 08/17/2008
Your points are interesting Robert,

However, it is important to remember that over a third of the people reading this post were for Edwards, believing he was sincere and humble, despite the mansion and haircuts. We're not talking rocket scientists.

So I'd keep the rhetoric simple and based on emotion.
09:27 AM on 08/17/2008
Can anyone explain, with intellectual honesty, how this is a good thing?

For Hillary, this will not be cathartic.

For those supporters who are STILL steaming, this will not be helpful; any significant vote for Hillary will simply vindicate their ogoing anger.

For those who have healed ob both sides, this will only stir up bad memories.

This is perhaps the worst decision this campaign has made so far. It feels like Kerry and Gore more and more every day.

And no, "she earned it," is not a response. When Kerry and Gore lost (or allowed their elections to be stolen), they didn't get a few minutes at the podium on Inauguration Day.

This is more Democratic Party self-destructive disorder. It's Kerry and Gore more and more every day. And I'm a big Obama and Axelrod supporter. If they lose this election, it will be because of 1) the Clintons, 2) the appeasement of the Clintons and 3) the appeasement of John McCain.
08:55 AM on 08/17/2008
After that "Saddleback" moment last night, I can just see the gears grinding to meet full speed to snatch that nomination from the jaws of victory.

Clinton must be cackling away after the young Senator from Illinois fell for the oldest trick in the book....

Bait and switch.
He was set up.
Reverend Ricky did a big BUSHCO allll over that stage.

"Got non-profit status?"

How can that mega-church fund this type of thing and STILL HAVE THEIR NON-PROFIT STATUS?

I am absolutely SICK of these theocratic nut cases.
07:14 PM on 08/16/2008
She earned it. Deal with it.
justobserve
Not left nor right or center. Just a free thinker!
09:55 PM on 08/16/2008
She lost it. Deal with it! If Hill really got "18 million votes", why does she still need help to clear her debts?
It's true that the convention is the coronation for the winner, not for the loser. This can only happen for the Clintons who only love themselves. if Hill had got what Obama got. he would have been in the shadow already.
08:54 AM on 08/17/2008
She 'earned' nothing.

Dems don't vote for pre-emptive war.
Dems don't vote against Dem's economic interests.
Dems don't DO 'eating their own'

Unless you are DLC kinda DINO...and that's HILLARY.
06:09 PM on 08/16/2008
"This is supposed to be a convention honoring Barack Obama for winning the most delegates "

No, it's not. It is a nominating convention. It is to elect the Democratic Party nominee for President.
01:00 PM on 08/16/2008
Hopefully, the Obama campaign made a deal with those two narcissists which include the following language: We'll give you maximum amount of exposure at the convention and then please disappear, never to be seen or heard from again!

I will ensure I'm watching something else when those two are scheduled to speak.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azcamp
10:49 AM on 08/16/2008
Enough Clinton drama already. This is the kind of drama that lost Hillary the primary.

Now the Clintons refuse to leave the stage. They lack the grace and temperament that great statesmen display. I hope we can get the Clinton circus to fold its tent and leave Denver without creating total chaos.

Most Americans wanted less drama, more results in Washington. That's why they voted for Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OtayPanky
You're welcome
01:44 AM on 08/16/2008
An amazingly on target piece.

Just as we can already look back and see the turning points in the primary fight - particularly in Bill Clinton's remarks about Jesse Jackson and South Carolina - so if Obama doesn't win in November we'll see this absurd hijacking of the convention as a big nail in the coffin.

Like you, I fear that Obama and his team have made a terrible mistake here. I hope I'm wrong.
photo
murphysgirl
I prefer coffee, not tea..
12:23 AM on 08/16/2008
I couldn't agree more with this piece. For far too long, the lead up to the convention has been about the Clintons. To be honest, I can't wait for the convention to be over so that there are no more Clinton distractions.

I'm tired of all of this lamenting from the Clinton campaign. I'm tired of the rabid Clinton supporters blaming Obama for everything under the sun and claiming they'll vote for McCain. I'm tired of the media's fascination with the Clintons. Lastly, I'm tired of the Clintons.

Obama is the Democratic nominee. Period.
11:42 PM on 08/15/2008
As an early supporter of Senator Obama Im already dissapointed that he's backpedaled on every issue that matters to dems. The anything for a vote mentality lost my vote in November.
He's seems as genuine as Edwards. Other than his cute smile and celebrity there's not much there.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JimR
08:35 AM on 08/16/2008
You're not getting it, but that's OK.
09:09 PM on 08/15/2008
The ironic thing to me is that the last time this happened; it was Jerry Brown in 1992 against Bill Clinton and if memory serves me well, the Clinton's were, well pretty ticked off at the whole idea. I guess if your the perpetrator than its perfectly allright to do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Yohomegirl
05:43 PM on 08/15/2008
I will be celebrating Obama, alone, on the 28th. She took the wind out of my plans for a party at the primary final by not being gracious enough to step down. Frick all that, Obama IS the nominee, and I intend to celebrate! OBAMA 08!
05:38 PM on 08/15/2008
I completely agree with you.

but I think at this point it comes down to this:

obama lets the clintons have their last hurrah, and then he'll never have to do a dam thing for them again. if he doesn't let them have their last hurrah, he's never going to hear the end of it and he will be undermined every step of the way by the clintons and the serfs in the clinton kingdom.

unfortunately, that is the reality-on-the-ground. and he's playing it well. much better than I would - I would tell them to gtf out of town and be sure to let the door hit you where it counts. but then I'd just be asking for trouble for myself from the vengeful clintons and their serfs.

as time goes by the clintons power will diminish and he won't have to worry about being undermined by them and their team. I think he's fully aware of that - he's dam smart. but I would bet the farm that he is anxiously waiting for august 29, when the clintons begin their slide into obscurity..
01:57 AM on 08/18/2008
Sounds good, but really, do you think the Clintons will ever go away? With those two egos.?!..I think they're planning their comeback in 2012 as we speak.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StephenDedalus82
05:16 PM on 08/15/2008
In other words, you're calling for this convention to be just as boring and pointless as it always is. Did you ever think that having the Clintons headline might attach more eyes to the screen? Regardless of whatever primary bitterness is left over, the Obama/Clinton deathmatch generated unprecedented interest in the Democratic party. More people came out to vote for each of them than any other candidate in history. This is a GOOD thing for the party (and hence, the country). The irony of no-drama Obama is that the drama is keeping Dems in the news cycles and giving Obama more exposure than he would ever have gotten if he didn't battle it out with someone as formidable as Clinton. Obama supporters seem to have this weird single-mindedness that doesn't allow them to see or acknowledge the other HALF of the party for whom Obama was, at most, a second choice. They just keep antagonizing Clinton supporters, as if having Clinton around hurts anybody. The Clintons may be evil villains to Obama supporters, but they represent peace, prosperity, and stability to millions of Americans. Having them on that stage can't possibly hurt. Don't stretch the coronation metaphor too far, we still need votes to win.
04:45 AM on 08/16/2008
Dream on. The Clintons have negative numbers of well over 50%. The only way more eyes will be 'attached' to the screen watching them will be those who will be watching to see if the Clintons let their egos overtake their smarts again and whether they'll do anything outrageous.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StephenDedalus82
01:16 PM on 08/16/2008
More Democrats support Clinton than Obama. Your wonder candidate is losing his luster and he just might lose this election. Egos don't concern me--all politicians have egos. What concerns me is Democrats winning, and I was against Obama because he was so clearly a huge gamble in a year we must win.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JimR
08:37 AM on 08/16/2008
Summary of your post: Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton

She lost. Time to move on now. If she wants to go out and campaign for Obama, that's more than welcome. That doesn't mean she gets to hog the spotlight for her own selfish needs.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StephenDedalus82
01:17 PM on 08/16/2008
It was Obama's idea. He's in charge, remember? According to your narrative of the universe, Obama can't even handle Hillary Clinton. How is he supposed to handle world affairs? I have more confidence in him than that. He knows he needs Hillary's voters because he has people crunching the numbers who are seeing how close this race really is. He's not going to lose his own supporters by allowing Clinton to champion herself, but he might gain a few of Clinton's.