Matt Watson is the opinion editor at The Reflector. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Although Hillary Clinton caused some to doubt her determination when she teared up last month, I have no doubt that she has a drive that outshines all the other candidates. I’m speaking of the drive to win, and I do not at all intend for this to be taken as a compliment.
As the 2000 presidential elections neared an end with controversial Florida recounts, Clinton readily advocated against the Electoral College.
“I believe strongly that in a democracy we should respect the will of the people, and to me that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president,” she said in a 2000 CBS news article.
However, she has not applied the same logic to the Democratic primaries of 2008. Her communications director, Howard Wolfson, said Clinton would rely on upstanding party leaders, the superdelegates, to grant her a nomination if Barack Obama gains the majority of pledged delegates through the popular vote. If Clinton receives a nomination in this manner, it would be the first time superdelegates ever determined a nomination in the Democratic National Convention.
So why the change of tone from 2000? Obviously, the fact that Obama is leading in delegates is beginning to scare Clinton. But there is never a reason for a politician to change her mind. And if she does, she is a “flip-flopper,” as we have been taught by so many Republicans over the years.
Clinton also flip-flopped earlier this year by keeping her name on the Michigan and Florida ballots after she agreed that the two states should be stripped of their delegates for holding primaries early.
Now she claims that her gains there should be counted even though she was the only candidate on the ballot. Since Clinton thinks she is being cheated, she has no shame in relying on superdelegates, although she should.
She brags often of the Democratic Party and Democratic ideals. Now could be her chance to prove she really believes in them, but she doesn’t want to be expected to concede if Obama takes most of the pledged delegates. Her drive to win is too great.
“We are interested in acquiring delegates, period,” Wolfson said.
In stark contrast to Clinton’s flowery speech about how important it is to let the people have their own voice, we now hear cut-and-dried language from her campaign.
From Clinton’s recent pouty television advertisement in Wisconsin to her failure to congratulate Obama on several primary wins, she is increasingly revealing that she is a sore loser, and she hasn’t even lost yet.
The Democratic race has run closer than we’re use to seeing. Therefore, the idea of relying on superdelegates to determine the nomination does have its merits. However, it has been a long race for both candidates, and the Democratic Party is going to suffer if neither candidate is able to take the spotlight before the convention in late August.
When the primaries end in June, the question Clinton is probably going to have to ask herself is this: What good will come from continuing the process longer than usual and thereby inhibiting her party from moving forward?