The World is Watching and Wants More: Clinton-Obama Race Should Go All the Way

Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton struggling against each other for every superdelegate, every pending state primary, every vote is the best thing America has had going for it in some time on the "global public diplomacy" front.

John McCain's subtle flirtation with vice presidential possibilities ranging from his former rival Mitt Romney to Mike Huckabee to Michael Bloomberg to Condoleezza Rice -- among others -- has caught the attention of people in Mumbai, Jakarta, Rio, Riyadh, Beijing, Damascus, and far more.

The world is seeing Americans struggle about who U.S. citizens want in the White House. There is no stacked deck, no automatic succession, no heir apparent -- and this political experience of dramatic uncertainty and the pairing of an elder pro-Iraq War POW torture-victim turned leading Senator vs. either the first African-American or female candidate has the feel of a presidential election of a life-time -- the kind that won't be forgotten for a century.

Anyone remember Mondale-Reagan? I didn't think so. . .

Neither Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama can win the Democratic primary through pledged delegates. Now, superdelegates and the candidate's nuanced strengths and weaknesses in the eyes of party elders could show those around the world another dimension of America's electoral system that few -- even in America -- get to see.

The race should go all the way to the Convention.

Dem leaders like Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Howard Dean should stop trying to end the process. Let it go to its conclusion -- and let's turn the process into something really magnificent to see in its fullest. . . kind of like a total solar eclipse. Totality.

Do the entire thing.

The world is watching, learning. And American popularity in the eyes of global citizens watching us is surging because of the excitement and uncertainty of this fascinating election.

-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

Comments

[hillarysupporter]

The world is watching us alright, and noticing that the Democratic party is F'd up.

[hardsun]

LOL :)

[Jazzcomedian]

In 1992, the first Bush left an economic mess, that Clinton cleaned up. When Clinton left office, Bush took over a cashed up, prosperous economy, with good relations with its allies.. Eight years later Bush the 2nd has left an even greater economic mess than the first Bush, and our allies view us with disdain. I'm an independent who was open-minded after Bush 2nd took office, and the objectively different results of eights years of Democratic policies, and eight years of Republican policies stand in stark contrast to each other. We are de-evolving as a nation right before our eyes. How come everybody can't see that? What am I missing?
If the Clinton and Obama supporters are seriously considering voting for McCain if their choice is not nominated, I'd have to seriously question their interest in the well-being of this nation. To let the Republican "tax cut" holy grail, greed, cronyism, fiscal irresponsibiility, and disregard for American citizens, values and civil liberties continue past election day 2008 out of spite, would simply be unconscionable. For anyone who has ever wondered what it was like to live during the Harding or Hoover adminstrations, now you know.

[RepublicanBrain]

Look a little further. You'll see that many of Clinton's economic plans happened with Republicans. He didn't do this on his own. For a true accounting of who Clinton really is, look at Justice Ginsberg. A President does not set policies, those are decisions made by a lot of people.

The interest in the well-being of this nation is not served by voting for Clinton (who failed at the things she was trying to do) or Obama (who is clueless and has never done it before). Look at their very own policies, and compare them to reality.

As for tax cuts, I'll say the same thing I always say that no one ever responds to: If you don't chip in for breakfast, don't expect to eat. Poor people don't foot taxes, they get it back through programs and refunds. Rich people are the ones footing their bill. It's no wonder the Democrats say Republicans don't care about the lower class. Who wants a class of people that basically amount to leeches.

As for values, the Democrats are far worse about things like that. They believe in unequal treatment and preferences for women and minorities that are undeserved. True equality comes when people ignore that crap and do things on merit. True responsibility comes when people blame themselves, and not society, or patriarchy, or whatever the buzzword is these days, for their failures, and do better by them.

[Jazzcomedian]

Republican Brain said: "You'll see that many of Clinton's economic plans happened with Republicans."
He also said, "True responsibility comes when people blame themselves, and not society, or patriarchy, or whatever the buzzword is these days, for their failures, and do better by them."
So, following your reason, should Republicans who controlled all three houses of government until 2006 take true responsibility and blames themselves for the economic, spiritual, and global mess our nation is in? Or is this the result of Democratic policies in your view? How does the policies of the Bush administration compare to the reality that we find ourselves in?
Since you are a Bush supporter I would like you or any other Republican on this board to please tell me exactly why you think that George Bush has been a good president for our nation these eight years. I'm an independent voter equally dissatisfied for many years with both parties, so I ask in a true interest of understanding your viewpoint. Have the Republicans earned another chance at government after these eight years on merit? List all the positives that you legitimately believe support returning the neo-con Republican philosophy to the White House for another term of government.

[pottylikearockstar]

First, Pelosi takes impeachment off the table and now she wants to confine the Superdelegates to voting as a slim majority has already done. Not to mention disenfranchising voters in Florida and Michigan. Last, but certainly not least, we have calls for an arbitrary caucus of Superdelegates in July to secure the nomination so Hillary will have little opportunity to lobby the Superdelegates before the Convention. If not Hillary, then McCain is "likeable enough."

[hinnis]

Sadly, we Democrats have found out that Pelosi, Dean and many other Democratic leaders are no better than their counterparts in the Republican Party. It's really all about politics, not the will of the voters. So, what we find is a party hierarchy which sanctions and supports the disenfranchisement of millions of voters in Michigan and Florida, the inherent unfairness of the caucus system, and the obviously inappropriate bias of the leadership against Hillary Clinton. The hypocrisy of some of these charlatans is mind boggling. Take Kerry, for example. He lost the election in 2004 amidst charges of voter fraud in Ohio. Now, he wants to support Obama, who's lawyers have actively prevented a revote in Michigan and Florida, just to further his selfish political ambitions. Since when has the Democratic Party become the party of disenfranchisement; the party of making excuses for the racist and anti-American rants of a Rev. Wright? Since when has the rank and file of the party also endorsed these things, so long as they help their candidate win the nomination? No, there doesn't appear to be much difference after all between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, at least when it comes to fairness and voter rights. I have been a lifelong Democrat, as has my family, but the actions of the party have destroyed our faith.

[hillarysupporter]

Pelosi, Reid, Dean and the other Democratic leaders are incompetent. They "allowed"
the Michigan /Florida fiasco to happen, and now they're just standing by, hoping it will
fix itself. They're a disgrace to the party, and every day I'm wondering whether I should
switch from Democrat to Independent.

[hinnis]

OBAMA WILL NOT COOPERATE IN RELEASING 8 YEARS OF HIS STATE SENATE RECORDS
Judicial Watch: Obama ‘intended to leave no paper trail’
By Klaus Marre
Posted: 03/26/08 01:01 PM [ET]
The president of a prominent watchdog group said Wednesday that he believes Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “intended to leave no paper trail” during his time in the Illinois Senate.

Judicial Watch, which has been seeking access to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) records from her time in the White House, argued Wednesday that the Illinois senator, who has criticized the former first lady for a lack of openness, has his own “records problem.”
“The more we learn about the Illinois Senator, the more obvious it becomes that he is anything but the ethically upright outsider he purports to be,” said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch.
The group rose to prominence when it repeatedly took on former President Bill Clinton during his time in office. It also sought records from the Bush administration regarding Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force.
In a statement, Fitton noted that his group has sought access to Obama’s records as a state senator and questioned whether the presidential candidate has been forthcoming with regard to what happened to those documents.
He said that “nobody knows where they are, if they exist at all” and claimed that “Obama’s story keeps changing.”

[sd4peace]

BS alert!

[Jazzcomedian]

I'm Black and I don't think Hillary should drop out of the race. Tenacity is a Clinton trait, as Bill (whom I do not like) demonstrated time and time again, and it's a good one to have in a president. They fight dirty, because they had to in order the defeat the Republicans in two national elections. If Obama can defeat the Clinton political machine, he'll be truly battle tested and ready for the Republican dirty ways.
I'm tired of Bill, but the Clintons left this country in very good shape in many ways. And that had to be by choice, because that is not a presidential given as George "Nero" Bush, and his Soviet Administration have demonstrated. Obama is inspirational, and the country needs that as much as it needs practical solutions. JFK was the last inspirational president. The simple eloquence, call to excellence, and moral clarity of his speeches still ring out. We need an intellect and thinker in the White House to reverse our de-evolutionary trend.
The Democrats nominate A students and the Republicans nominate C students, and this election won't be different. Last Democratic president--Oxford scholar. Present Republican president--academic underachiever. Obama/Clinton-- A students. John McCain--finished 894th out of 899 in his Naval class. When I was having trouble in class I asked the A student for help not the C student. Why won't the voters do the same?

[hinnis]

OBAMA: DIRTY POLITICIAN FROM THE START: Chicago Sun-Times—A close examination of Obama’s first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: Obama, who runs on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless, first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it. Alice Palmer, friend and mentor to Obama, served the district in the Illinois Senate for much of the 1990s. Decades earlier, she was a community organizer in the area when Obama was growing up in Hawaii. She risked her safe seat to run for Congress and touted Obama as a suitable successor. But when Palmer lost the congressional race, her supporters asked Obama to fold his campaign so she could easily retain her state Senate seat. Obama not only refused to step aside for the woman who was his friend and had recommended him for the seat, he filed challenges that nullified Palmer’s hastily gathered nominating petitions, forcing her to withdraw. Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. “He wondered if we should knock everybody off the ballot. How would that look?” said Ronald Davis, the paid Obama campaign consultant whom Obama referred to as his “guru of petitions.” Davis filed objections to all four of Obama’s Democratic rivals at the candidate’s behest. All other candidates were disposed of by Obama’s challenges. He then went on to win the election.
http://tinyurl.com/2zwwte

[idontthinkthisishelping]

I absolutely agree. Hillary is down on pledged delegates, states won and the popular vote, as are Edwards, Richarson, Mondale, Humphrey and McGovern -- I say bring them all back. Clinton'08 is inevitably going to need a governmental bailout; I say impose a "special tax," due tomorrow, of all U.S. citizens to keep her historically important and internationally facinating campaign alive. Lincoln's was a pretty good show, too, so let's bring him back, but don't cheat him with 19th century dollars -- I mean don't cheat the rest of them with 21st century dollars.

I also say if Vince McMahon can reach more viewers and can guarantee an eternal run on every NBC/Universal outlet, give him some Federal money, too. The world LOVES our professional wrestling. We CAN'T deny them our oily men in Speedos.

[Lindy222]

Yes! In fact, I was thinking the other day, after Hillary said that her supporters believe she'd be the better President and Commander in Chief, that there are surely many out there who think Chris Dodd, John Edwards, and the others would make the President and Commander in Chief.

And yet, they're out of it.

Steve Clemons says the world is watching and wants more. Perhaps. Or perhaps, as John Sudbay says over at americablog.com, it's bizarre, disturbing and yet weirdly fascinating to watch Clinton in action these days.

[Kache]

I agree, Hillary should stay in the race, but for different reasons. Hillary is the one playing the race card, not McCain. Compare her comment "Well I would have walked out!!" to McCain's "I know Senator Obama and I know he does not believe the [Wright] comments I've heard on television".

Hillary is giving Obama an opportunity to air his dirty laundry before the general election season gets into swiftboat waters. And, attempting to portray himself as the adult, McCain is positioning himself to have to tell Rush and crowd to "grow up" later on.

I even wonder if Hill and Barry haven't cooked this up. It's easy to make the case that if Barack can weather the Clinton machine he'll do just fine against a demoralized, psychotic, and under-funded Republican Party. He's gotten to this point in his career coming up through Chicago politics, a place where politics is practiced with a crowbar. And he's done it with jujitsu, tricking his opponent into hitting himself in the head with his own crowbar. He'll do just fine against McCain.

Besides, how would Hillary quit? What, she and Jane Curtin are going to do an old skit on SNL with Hillary playing Rosanna Rosanna Dana and ending with a sheepish "Nevermind". Aint gonna happen.

[Rule Of Law]

Quite simply--Who cares what the world wants?

[rojo7449]

So much for foreign policy, eh? You don't think the determination of these two candidates won't resonate as a stern ability to stand their ground to the rest of the world? You don't think the value of a democracy isn't worth letting the world in on? The concept of voting (or having it taken away, and one candidate fighting to give it back) isn't of interest to other parts of the world?

So, quite simply, many of us care what the world wants.

[PennP]

"Determination" may play here okay--and only up to a point--but it's not necessarily going to weather well in other cultures. This is our election, not foreign-policy, and not infotainment for the rest of the world. If it becomes a sad spectacle, it could wind up doing more for anti-democracy sentiment than advancing any positive agenda for us around the globe.

[hinnis]

OBAMA BUYING THE DELEGATES:
These are the latest figures from an article in the Seattle Times:
Since 2005, Obama's PAC has donated $710,900 to superdelegates, more than three times as much as Clinton's PAC. Her PAC distributed $236,100 to superdelegates during the same time.
The study found that the presidential candidate who gave more money to the superdelegates received their endorsements 82 percent of the time. That's based on a review of elected officials who are serving as superdelegates and who had endorsed a candidate as of Feb. 25.

[rojo7449]

I haven't noticed any Obama supporters understanding what a PAC is, so you probably aren't going to get too far trying to educate them on this.

[sd4peace]

if this is true and they are both donating money, then it seems that both are buing them. it would be one thing if you said he was but she wasn't

[JXB]

In some sense, Mr. Clemons is right. U.S. presidential and presidential nomination campaigns have served as examples to the world of the potency of American democracy, and no doubt this nomination campaign cycle, particularly on the Democratic side, is as high profile as any has been. But there is dark storm cloud on the horizon waiting to make landfall in this campaign. If the second place finisher in the Democratic primary/caucus electoral contests is ultimately selected as the nominee by Party officials and insiders over the first place finisher, the "global public diplomacy" message to the world will be that America puts on a good show about democracy and the power of the people, but in the end it's only for show.

[doofusinamerica]

by all means please continue the campain. we need all the humor we can get

[Nommo]

I like your spelling "campain". Absolutely the right sentiment.

[rojo7449]

So, now just following the democratic process is a joke to you? Nevermind, Doofus In America, you already know that.

[altohone]

Normally, Steve would be right.

However, with the Limbaugh manipulation having already influenced the last 3 primaries thus encouraging them to continue through the last 10, we are now into a phase where the "winner" is possibly being chosen by GOP voters voting AGAINST our choice.

There isn't anything positive about this, and claiming it's good for democracy is pure whitewash.

[olandug]

Obama’s Bible Study Class

James Meeks – an Illinois state senator, pastor of one of the largest churches in the state and a declared Spiritual Adviser for Obama – came under fire for comments rebroadcast last week calling white American mayors "slave masters" and referring to black preachers and politicians who "protect" the "white man" as "house n-ggers."

"We don't have slave masters, we got mayors," Meeks said in an August 2006 sermon broadcast on a Chicago community television channel.
Aside from his senatorial duties, Meeks is an Illinois Superdelegate pledged to Obama and also presides over Salem Baptist Church, described as the largest church in Illinois.


In 2006, Meeks informed his church during a sermon he may run for Illinois governor. He was recorded telling the mostly black congregation any "white Christian" who doesn't vote for him is a "racist."

Meeks is also notorious for his strong anti-homosexual platform, although Obama is campaigning for the "gay" vote. Meeks has routinely voted against pro-homosexual legislation and has been quoted during sermons referring to same-sex attraction "an evil sickness."

Obama told the Sun-Times that he attends Meeks' Salem Baptist Church for Wednesday night Bible study.

According to Illinois State Board of Elections records, Rezko's businesses, Rezmar Corp. and Rezko Concession, contributed to Meeks' campaign funds.

[Tejano1]

more stupid slime. good god, give it a freakin' rest already. no one except pointy-headed closet racists give a damn.

[ulahane]

Reality check. This is why Obama is not electable in November. His tolerance of Wright's, Meeks, and others hatred will cause him to loose 40-45 states. America does care. I'm not saying that this is necessarily how it should be; it is how it will be.

[hinnis]

I have an idea. All those who agree with and make excuses for hatred and racism directed towards "white people" (as Rev. Wright would say), vote for Obama; all others vote for Hillary. See, it's very simple.

[hinnis]

OBAMA"S RELIGION
News Type: Opinion " Mon Mar 17, 2008
When Rev. Wright got into a spitting contest with TV host Sean Hannity last year, he at one point refused to answer Hannity's badgering questions and kept asking Hannity "Have you read James Cone, what do you know about black theology? Have you read Cone?"
James Cone is one of he founders, some say the founder, of Black Liberation Theology. Rev. Jeremiah Wright's ministry, his beliefs about America, and about life itself are formed by his attraction to and acceptance of the writings of James Cone.
Let's look at some quotes from James Cone.
__________­__________
The time has come for white America to be silent and listen to black people.
All white men are responsible for white oppression.
Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man the devil.
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.

[Tejano1]

did you and oladung get up this morning and confer about a dual slime attack on obama? still trying to scare white people? you're pathetic.

[hinnis]

Do your homework; look it up. Just because the facts don't fit with your image of your "Messiah" do not mean they are not correct. When you've done your due diligence on this issue, get back to me.