Checking in from England, I see that Obama has gathered enough elected delegates to convince those unelected superdelegates to announce for him, or to switch over to his side -- including our own Los Angeles representative, Maxine Waters, long a loyal Clintonista.
Meanwhile, I see, our Hillary is still not ready to give up the fight. Ourselves in the Obama camp since the California primaries -- and myself, since John Edwards's withdrawal -- we have been surprised to meet many avid, even angry Clinton supporters on our travels. We have heard, frequently, the accusation of sexism leveled against Obama and his campaign team. The use of the word "shrill" to describe Hillary's behavior, in particular, has been picked out as one that identifies the worst of sexism on our side. For myself, while I realize how commonly the word is used offensively to stereotype women, I also believe that it's a word that carries a value and meaning other than that stereotype, and that Hillary has, in fact, slipped over into excess in language and in capitalizing on her victimhood.
Months back, I would have been elated to have had the chance to vote for a woman candidate; now, were she the Democratic Party's nominee, I would still vote for her without qualms, but with less enthusiasm. To those who say that Obama is untested, that he lacks experience, that all he has going for him is preachy rhetoric I would say: take a good look at the history of the two campaigns and compare them. Hillary, frankly, has made a hash of hers. She can't simply blame the media, blame sexism, blame others for the failure. She started out an easy frontrunner, with the full weight of the party machinery behind her. It was hers to lose, and she lost it. She cannot disclaim responsibility for the mismanagement that brought her to this point. By the same token, the Obama campaign has remained relatively dignified, has survived the worst of crises, has been even-keeled, efficient and well-managed throughout. I think the man can take some credit for that.
So looking at nothing more than the management of the campaigns, I say that Obama has proved himself the greater potential leader of the two -- one who is capable of listening, stepping back, re-grouping, maintaining a dignified calm not only within himself but amongst his supporters, keeping on track and achieving the eventual goal with fortitude and imperturbable strength. I realize that others, those Clinton supporters who have still not accepted the alternative possibility will disagree with my assessment. It's just my view. I only hope, for the sake of the country, that sound reasoning will soon replace the current emotional posturing, and that neither one of the candidates will have sufficiently alienated the supporters of the other for the Democrats to lose the real battle of ideas and issues that must now take place between this moment and November.
And, yes, let's be ready for that October surprise. I put absolutely nothing past Bush and his team of incompetent ideologues, desperate to keep their hold on power. They will do anything to win. Hillary should have learned enough from the example of their political tactics to have resisted every opportunity to emulate them. She did not. And clearly the American voters have decided they want something different from their politicians than falsification and attack. Real strength is made of other qualities than these.