::::::::
Now the end is near, can Hillary repair the damage she’s caused to the Democratic Party? For quite a while now, she’s been putting out the talking point that “more people” have voted for her than Obama. That’s only true if you believe that voters in the caucus states that don’t even report popular vote tallies aren’t “people.” Aliens, perhaps?
Until the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting Saturday, I was annoyed at this misleading and disingenuous argument. However, after seeing and hearing the protestors during that meeting, I now think this canard is also potentially explosive, as it telegraphs to her supporters, that Barack Obama is stealing the primary election from her.By using this argument, Hillary makes a set of analogies, that create powerful images in the minds of some Democrats. The use of the term “popular vote” immediately brings to mind 2000, where Al Gore won the popular vote but not the presidency.
She also - perhaps subliminally - brings to mind some powerful racial and gender imagery. To women, the idea of a young man, surpassing the more experienced woman by virtue of the “old boys’ network,” may be close to the surface. Alternatively, her argument also evokes "affirmative action scenarios" that have been exploited in elections past.
Clinton has exploited these hot buttons, with little apparent concern for the consequences that may ensue. Once you’ve implied that your opponent is stealing your rightful place as the nominee, how do you dial back from that? And, now that Hillary has strangely indicated her willingness to be V.P., before confirming her willingness to concede, how can she possibly bring those angry supporters on board? And beyond that, how can she stop them from protesting - with perhaps “Chicago” consequences - at the Democratic National Convention in Denver?
In my mind, a key qualification for president - or vice-president - is the ability see beyond your own motives, to think about the larger consequences of your actions.
