Harping on a Moot Point

[babylonsister]

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2008/05/harping-on-moot-point.html

Harping on a Moot Point


The Clinton campaign and its many surrogates are obsessed with pointing that Clinton has done better than Obama among low-income white voters in the primaries. They argue, to anyone who will listen, that Clinton's strength among this demographic means that she would be a stronger general election candidate than Obama. Putting aside the merits of that particular argument in some hypothetical universe, can someone please explain the concept of 'mootness' to Clinton supporters?

Perhaps it's true (though I doubt it) that, all things being equal, Clinton would be a stronger general election candidate. The point, however, is that all things are not equal. As things stand now, Obama has an insurmountable lead among pledged delegates and will, in all likelihood, end up with more popular votes than Clinton. So the only way that Clinton can win is by convincing the superdelegates to give the nomination to the candidate who comes in second in both delegates and votes.

Now, I seriously doubt that's going to happen, but if it did, the candidate who emerged would be very damaged. She would be the nominee of an utterly fractured party. Obama's supporters would not consider her to be the legitimate winner, much the way Democrats considered Bush's 2000 election win to be illegitimate. African-Americans (and many others) would be insensed that the first black candidate with a real shot at the presidency was denied his chance by a coup of party insiders. Whatever support Clinton has among blue collar whites (and I think that support is vastly overstated) would likely be offset by the disillusionment and resentment among many other groups, including African-Americans, young voters, and the many first-time voters who have turned out for Obama.

To put things another way, Obama can win the nomination in a way that everyone will consider to be legitimate, in a way that doesn't shatter the Democratic coalition. Clinton cannot. So at this point, Obama is necessarily the most electable candidate. It makes no sense to consider general election matchups in a vacuum. Clinton can only win if Obama is denied the nomination, and he's just come too far at this point to be denied the nomination. He's the presumptive nominee, and if that is taken away from him (at least by anything other than a self-induced implosion), there will be hell to pay.

So the question of Obama's weakness among blue-collar whites is at best a moot point at this stage in the game. Obviously he'll need to address any weaknesses in his coalition as we move toward the general election, but at this point, there is no other viable alternative. Clinton is too far behind to win this nomination in anything other than a deeply controversial way. And winning that way would make her a much weaker candidate. There's no getting around that.