Hit the (High) Road, Hillary

It’s time for Hillary to hit the road. Would someone please tell her?

If Hillary had won the last 11 primaries in a row and was leading in delegates, she would be loudly and proudly directing Barack Obama to bow out. So would the media, the Democratic Party establishment, and everyone else. But the tables are turned. Why isn’t anyone calling for Hillary to call it quits? Hillary’s sense of entitlement to the Presidency seems to have been shared by those covering this election, as well as by her insider pals in the Democratic Party, many of whom crowned her the inevitable candidate before any votes were cast.

Despite Barack Obama’s soaring popularity and winning streak, the election is still presented as Hillary’s to win. As a commentator on Michael Baisden’s radio show recently observed, Obama’s wins have been viewed by the media through the lens of “Let’s see what Hillary needs to do to beat him now,” rather than as the well deserved victories of a front-runner. It is telling that Hillary is unwilling to make concession speeches when she loses. She’s so obviously annoyed that Obama is still around, crashing what was supposed to be her party. Desperate to save what she sees as rightfully hers, she’s tearing him down as best she can – you remember, the “fun part.”

There are two potential outcomes to this strategy. One possibility is that Obama emerges as the Democratic nominee, and Hillary has to support him after her negative campaigning has dinged him up for the general election (Hillary will presumably flip-flop and concede that Obama will be ready enough on Day 1). The other possibility is that Hillary will win the nomination with her party insiders and her stone-throwing, and thousands of disillusioned Americans will go back to what they were doing before they found a candidate who could inspire them. These are not desirable outcomes for the Democratic Party or for America. But Hillary doesn’t see it that way, and neither do her followers and surrogates.

Former Vice-Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro asserts in Monday’s New York Times that the super-delegates should lead the Democratic Party in determining its nominee and not follow the will of the voters to Obama. She argues that Obama has won states where the primaries were open to more than Democrats – Republicans and Independents voted for him too! – and that this diminishes the significance of his victories in those contests. Party loyalists and insiders, she claims, are better suited to choose the Democratic nominee.

This argument is reminiscent of Hillary’s reaction to Obama winning Kansas and other so-called “red states.” Hillary’s campaign argued that since those states will never vote blue, Obama’s victories mean little. Last time I checked, the Democratic Party has a 50-state strategy under Howard Dean’s leadership (someone who knows something about inspiring young voters and being quashed by the party establishment). Apparently Hillary and her gang didn’t get the memo. Obama’s ability to reach Republican and independent voters may very well be what clinches the general election for him. It’s not a weakness that he can attract these voters in the primary and win in red states – it’s a major strength that Hillary (despite her gung-ho vote for war) will never have.

Ms. Ferraro also notes that her Presidential ticket lost in 1984, but “that loss had nothing to do with Democratic Party infighting.” The next loss might. Hillary’s supporters will argue that she still has a fighting chance, she’s still leading in Ohio where we vote next week, and she’s neck and neck in Texas. If Hillary ekes out a victory in one or both states, will she take that as a mandate that she is now America’s candidate? The map of Obama’s victories suggests otherwise.

It is becoming clear to more and more people that Obama is a candidate who will lead the party, and eventually the nation, with vision, intelligence, character, and class. He’s a candidate who can win over voters in the middle and even on the right. The country is coming together around a remarkable leader, but it’s not Hillary. That doesn’t discount her intelligence and capabilities (although I question the experience by osmosis argument), but she is not the leader we need, right here, right now. It’s her time to bow out gracefully and offer Senator Obama her full support. If she’s truly in this race for her country and not for herself, it’s time for Hillary to show it and take the high road – home.