Hillary´s ´Dream Team´ Swan Song
Rizwan Ghani
March 07, 2008
The idea of Obama-Hillary sharing offices of US president and vice-president being sold as ´dream team´ must be ´tazered´. It is a part of deadly spin that in all probability is supported by Hillary camp to keep her in the race and staying in the race just long enough to try to bargain for country´s Vice-president. The delay in nominating Democratic Party presidential nominee is already harming Party interests in national campaign as McCain continues unchallenged with his hocus pocus of 3 am telephone call, national security and experience.
The dream team idea is nothing more than a last ditch effort by Hillary to stay in power after losing pledged delegate race. The result of Texas caucuses in which according to latest reports Obama was leading with 56% (Hillary 44%) shows that Obama is the Democratic Party presidential nominee.
I will support my argument by maintaining that that Obama is still leading pledged delegates (113)[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_
(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008] after Crucial Tuesday and Texas result will bolster his position. A lead of single delegate cannot be undermined because it is a lead. American elections have always been very close. Look at the elections results in which J.F.K won the race to White House. The elections drew a record 69 million voters to the polls, but Kennedy won by only 113,000 votes. He won 49.7 percent of the popular vote, and Nixon won 49.6 percent. It was the closest popular vote in 72 years. Kennedy received 303 electoral votes to Nixon´s 219. The 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections were equally close.
The logic of Hillary campaign is self-defeating, in which they are trying to make a case of reaching magic number of 2015 or else Super Delegates will be involved. There are supporting voices trying to tell the voters, "that is why super delegates are there´. It is not the case. It is undemocratic. Super Delegates cannot undermine the voice of the voters reflected in pledged delegate numbers. The pledged-delegate math done by independent observers including CNN shows that game is over for Hillary, therefore she must withdraw to help Democratic Party to help Obama lead the party to White House.
In terms of Hillary being touted as part of dream team will destroy Democratic Party bid to change America. Hillary as representative of ´status quo´ will be a drag for Obama who stands for hope and promises change. Hillary´s presence will be drag than support. In the reverse situation Obama as VP will be virtually left ´ineffective´ because Hillary has left no doubt in mind of her voters that how she intends to deal with national foreign policy including stay the course on Iraq war and continue with current use of power to resolve international problems instead of upholding national and international laws.
Obama will have no place in this kind of policy and direction. In all probability, he will not like to work with Hillary. It is something that most people know in both camps. In my view, John Edwards or Bill Richardson could be the most suitable choice for the office of US VP. John Edwards can come forward and endorse Obama. It will help Democratic Party focus. It will bring handful of very important advantages to the party. For example, Edwards could attract some 34 million voters living below federal poverty line of 20, 634 dollars annually. His bold stand to end corruption and fight against corporate America will attract independent voters, young voters and blue-collar voters. Richardson will bring his management experience as governor, flexibility on immigration reforms and ´hands on´ foreign policy experience with him.
It is unfortunate to see how low Hillary camp stooped to win Ohio by twisting NAFTA. In all probability, the details given in ´Tory bumbling blamed for Obama leak´ (http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/309925) shed enough light to help understand the extent of dirty politics. The links in the news also help understand roles and stakes. Obama, despite all this has emerged stronger.
Obama,s strength in Texas and Vermont in Crucial Tuesday vote, lead in pledged delegate placing him closer to 2012 and narrowing difference in super delegates show that democratic voters prefer Obama. Obama has won 27 out of 41 contests leaving Hillary with only 14. Similarly, the Obama supporters by donating 55 million dollars to his campaign in month of Feb have proved that he is the Democratic Party presidential nominee. It is therefore time that party leadership including Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi ask Hillary to withdraw from the race in party and national interest. The current race after Crucial Tuesday has simply turned into a personal game in which Hillary is trying to stay in power. It is undermining future of Democratic Party in national elections. The Democrat voters should not fall for the ´Dream team´ stint it is her swan song.
Finally, the spin should not blur the distinction between Hillary and Obama. They stand for are two separate and distinct visions. Media instead of confusing the party voters should allow the democratic process support Obama to lead Democratic Party.
The dream team idea is nothing more than a last ditch effort by Hillary to stay in power after losing pledged delegate race. The result of Texas caucuses in which according to latest reports Obama was leading with 56% (Hillary 44%) shows that Obama is the Democratic Party presidential nominee.
I will support my argument by maintaining that that Obama is still leading pledged delegates (113)[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_
(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008] after Crucial Tuesday and Texas result will bolster his position. A lead of single delegate cannot be undermined because it is a lead. American elections have always been very close. Look at the elections results in which J.F.K won the race to White House. The elections drew a record 69 million voters to the polls, but Kennedy won by only 113,000 votes. He won 49.7 percent of the popular vote, and Nixon won 49.6 percent. It was the closest popular vote in 72 years. Kennedy received 303 electoral votes to Nixon´s 219. The 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections were equally close.
The logic of Hillary campaign is self-defeating, in which they are trying to make a case of reaching magic number of 2015 or else Super Delegates will be involved. There are supporting voices trying to tell the voters, "that is why super delegates are there´. It is not the case. It is undemocratic. Super Delegates cannot undermine the voice of the voters reflected in pledged delegate numbers. The pledged-delegate math done by independent observers including CNN shows that game is over for Hillary, therefore she must withdraw to help Democratic Party to help Obama lead the party to White House.
In terms of Hillary being touted as part of dream team will destroy Democratic Party bid to change America. Hillary as representative of ´status quo´ will be a drag for Obama who stands for hope and promises change. Hillary´s presence will be drag than support. In the reverse situation Obama as VP will be virtually left ´ineffective´ because Hillary has left no doubt in mind of her voters that how she intends to deal with national foreign policy including stay the course on Iraq war and continue with current use of power to resolve international problems instead of upholding national and international laws.
Obama will have no place in this kind of policy and direction. In all probability, he will not like to work with Hillary. It is something that most people know in both camps. In my view, John Edwards or Bill Richardson could be the most suitable choice for the office of US VP. John Edwards can come forward and endorse Obama. It will help Democratic Party focus. It will bring handful of very important advantages to the party. For example, Edwards could attract some 34 million voters living below federal poverty line of 20, 634 dollars annually. His bold stand to end corruption and fight against corporate America will attract independent voters, young voters and blue-collar voters. Richardson will bring his management experience as governor, flexibility on immigration reforms and ´hands on´ foreign policy experience with him.
It is unfortunate to see how low Hillary camp stooped to win Ohio by twisting NAFTA. In all probability, the details given in ´Tory bumbling blamed for Obama leak´ (http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/309925) shed enough light to help understand the extent of dirty politics. The links in the news also help understand roles and stakes. Obama, despite all this has emerged stronger.
Obama,s strength in Texas and Vermont in Crucial Tuesday vote, lead in pledged delegate placing him closer to 2012 and narrowing difference in super delegates show that democratic voters prefer Obama. Obama has won 27 out of 41 contests leaving Hillary with only 14. Similarly, the Obama supporters by donating 55 million dollars to his campaign in month of Feb have proved that he is the Democratic Party presidential nominee. It is therefore time that party leadership including Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi ask Hillary to withdraw from the race in party and national interest. The current race after Crucial Tuesday has simply turned into a personal game in which Hillary is trying to stay in power. It is undermining future of Democratic Party in national elections. The Democrat voters should not fall for the ´Dream team´ stint it is her swan song.
Finally, the spin should not blur the distinction between Hillary and Obama. They stand for are two separate and distinct visions. Media instead of confusing the party voters should allow the democratic process support Obama to lead Democratic Party.
Print
Email
