The S.C. primary: Edwards gains; Clintons wreck havoc

Public Policy Polling of Raleigh, Dean Debnam’s firm, is out with its primary-eve poll. Barack Obama is solidly first at 44 percent, with Hillary Clinton dropping to 24 percent and John Edwards rising (per his new “America Rising” theme song) to 19 percent. It’s all at the PPP site. Enough Democrats are still undecided for Edwards — the “grown-up” at the Clinton-Obama food fight this week — to maybe wind up second, Debnam says.

If Obama wins, that’ll be two for him (with Iowa) and two for her (NH, Nevada) in the opening set of four. What’s significant is that neither of the front-runners was able to wrap this thing up in a way that would’ve set him/her on a course to winning in November — as both were hoping to do. And in fact, both have managed to fumble away or contaminate the Democrats’ “change” message, perhaps irreparably. Obama, because he’s let the Clintons paint him as unsteady. Clinton, because she’s given up on being the first woman president and is now presenting her campaign as a chance to resume what, in her mind anyway, was the old co-presidency with Bill.

***

The Clinton campaign has successfully blunted Obama’s post-Iowa surge. But in doing so, they’ve exacted a terrible price on themselves and the country. Because as Edwards so cogently said in the Myrtle Beach debate, this isn’t about the three of them (or is it four?). It’s about what’s going to happen to America. More in this vein below .

Remember where we were less than a month ago.

Hillary Clinton was still draped in her aura of inevitability. She was far ahead in the national polls, ahead or tied in Iowa, far ahead in NH — a woman in control. She was masterful on the issues. Had dominated the debates. The “most experience” of the leading candidates — which was true even if you subtracted the years she was counting that were really Bill’s experience. And Bill? He was at her side from time to time, conveying the news that there would be no messy break-up of their marriage should we elect his wife. But she was the show, not he. She was running for president. He was going to be her roving ambassador.

As for the horse race back then, if Hillary could win Iowa, she’d follow up with a big win in NH, roll through Nevada, and at the time she was leading in South Carolina, where a lot of black voters still think well of the Clintons and weren’t convinced that the country was ready for young Obama as the first African-American prez. In other words, it was entirely possible that an unscuffed Hillary Clinton would today be on the verge of wrapping up the Democratic nomination, if she’d not done so already, with a win in the Palmetto state. A strong leader, ready on day one, with a year to prepare until her inauguration. It was all there to be had at the holidays.
***

Now take Obama. A month ago, he was Prince Valient. The “change” candidate going up against the Clintons’ tired and tiresome special-interest politics. Obama was on the uptick, inspiring, post-racial. He was a powerful new force in America. If he could win Iowa, the bounce might carry him to victory in New Hampshire too, after which he’d win Nevada (he almost did anyway) and South Carolina. Which would mean that he — not Clinton — would today be on the verge of wrapping up the nomination. It would be a fabulous upset victory! With the promise of a soaring campaign season ahead that would bring the country together in common purpose. You could see that happening too, back at the holidays.

***

So what do we have today instead? We have Clinton, alternatively desperate and angry, hurling “slumlord” accusations at Obama while her husband runs around trashing him at every opportunity. We have Obama, pissy and defensive, seeming to invoke Ronald Reagan as an example of someone with “ideas” — rich people should get richer? is that an idea? — while forgetting to flesh out his own. Universal health care? He’s had every chance to embrace it. He doesn’t want to. Break big-oil’s grip? Maybe he could talk about that. Or the war. But no, he’s throwing the mud back at Hillary while “explaining” his record in the Illinois state Senate. Talk about being knocked off your perch.

Sure, Obama’s winning South Carolina. But nationally, Hillary’s still ahead, gaining white support even as she concedes — no, by conceding — the African-American vote. It’s her Sister Souljah moment. She’s so not trying to win South Carolina, in fact, that she may end up third there, behind native-son Edwards. Which can be explained away because he is a native son. Meanwhile, her slash-and-burn tactics are working great in the “big” Feb. 5 states like California and New York, where’s she’s stopped Obama cold.

Bottom line, then: The Clintons have cut Obama down to size, reducing him to “the black candidate” but also cutting Hillary too because of her unprecedented claim that Bill-Hill should get a third presidential term because, after all, there are two of them. Sadly, should she win, it won’t be on her own nickel as the first woman president. No, the clear message of the Clinton campaign today is that the two Clintons already were the first co-presidency, and they’ll be an even better pair this time around because Bill’s a tougher wingman than Hillary ever was.

And in a pinch, who’ll make the hard calls in a Hillary administration? Well, now that you’ve heard Hillary’s rendition of how it worked back in Clinton I, do you know who made them then?

***

So which would you rather have as president? A diminished Obama, who insists that the route to change goes through the Republican side of the aisle? Or the miserably effective Clintons, who grind it out regardless of the toll on themselves or others.

But wasn’t this supposed to be an election about bold change — about universal health care, global warming, ending our dependence on imported oil, rebuilding the country’s infrastructure, stopping the march to ever-great wealth and income inequality, and renewing our resolve to end poverty in America? What happened to all that?

What happened is, it’s now all about the Clintons and whether they’re tougher than young Obama. As for the issues, you’d have to be listening to Edwards to hear anything about them. And right now, no one is.

This entry was posted from Bob Geary on Friday, January 25th, 2008 at 1:08 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.