How to Lose an Election

"I don't belong to any organized political party," Will Rogers was reputed to have said. "I'm a Democrat."

It looked so good for us. Tired of seven years of Bush-Cheney rule, most Americans want change. They're sick of five years of war in Iraq, and worried about the economy. All seemed right in the world for a change in the White House, and we had just the Democrat for the job.

Even better, we had two Democrats, one who could become the first woman and the other the first African-American to ever hold the office. The woman was tough, experienced, and married to a popular former president, with one of the best political machines in history at her disposal. Her opponent was young, energetic, and full of charisma, with a promise of change for all those left behind by the Great American Oil Rush. And the other side nominated a 71 year-old man who even his party doesn't support, and who looks like someone you'd see driving too slowly on the highway.

How could we lose? Americans were rushing to the polls in each state's primary -- with short lines for the Republicans, and long lines for the Democrats. The race for the nomination became the top news story since early February, and all America stood watch to see who would surge ahead. We were for healthcare, better schools, an end to the war, while they were for keeping the troops right where they are, tax breaks for the rich, and drilling in Alaskan wildlife reserves.

But alas, the party that brought us John Kerry, Al Gore, Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale has found a way to lose this one as well. First it was the red-faced sniping between Clinton and Obama supporters, who were convinced that pouring on the negatives would boost their candidate. Then, it was the fiascos in stereo that were the Florida and Michigan primaries, where the party first kicked both states out of the process, then sought a way to get them back in. After all was said and done, both Michigan and Florida responded, "Thanks, but no thanks."

Now here we are, with Obama holding a lead of about 150 pledged delegates over Clinton. It is five weeks before the Pennsylvania primary, where we have to wait to watch the voters of Pennsylvania decide. . . absolutely nothing. Then, it will be another two weeks until the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, which will decide. . . absolutely nothing. In fact, we will go through the entire fifty states, plus Guam and Puerto Rico and neither side will end up with the 2024 votes needed to win the nomination.

And that brings us to the convention in Denver. That convention will be exciting, but it will be all about superdelegates, and wondering whom each is going to vote for. And after all the time we spent listening to the candidates, watching debates, traveling to caucuses or standing in line at primaries, it will be about 800 party bigwigs who will decide whom we nominate. Hillary will likely need more votes than Obama, but she has more connections, and let's be honest, can play the game better. Obama will likely have the most popular votes, most states, and most delegates, and those superdelegates that base their decision on those factors will side with him.

Coming out of the convention, we will finally have a candidate. But we will have a split party, a whole bunch of disenfranchised rank and file voters, and only two months to run for president. That's right. Did I mention that the convention is in late August and the election is in early November? Subtract a week for the GOP convention in September, when all eyes will turn to Minneapolis and what the Republicans have to say. That leaves about seven or eight weeks to raise money, run ads, and state our case to the American people.

Meanwhile, John McCain is already doing exactly that. He is in a debate with no opponent, raising money hand over fist, and getting a free pass from the media. He is shaking hands with the president, making a trip to Iraq to meet with generals and foreign leaders, and resting his tired old bones for the short campaign ahead. The only bad day that he's had since Super Tuesday was the day that a Democrat had to explain to him that Iranians were not training al Qaeda.

This is how we manage to lose elections, people. It's not that we're being outspent. It's not that America loves Jesus. It's not even that white guys poll better than non-whites or even non-guys. It's that we can't get our act together enough to give a candidate a fighting chance against the other side. Between Howard Dean's er, leadership, and the campaigns' scorched earth mentalities, and the ridiculous rules for the process, we're going to go into the general election at a serious disadvantage that WE PUT OURSELVES IN. It's as if we were the Patriots taking on the Giants, favored by two touchdowns, and we decided to tie our own shoes together.

So, Howard, if you're out there, here's what you do. Send a letter to all of the superdelegates and tell them two things. First tell them that this is the last time they will be superdelegates. Next time around, they will have one vote in their own precinct, just like everyone else. And second, tell them that they'd better be ready to cast their vote on the day after the final primary, which is sometime in June. Once the primaries are over, they will have 24 hours to vote. No need to book an airline ticket. An email will be fine. Or the Internet. I just picked 63 basketball games over the Internet in about two minutes, so they should be able to pick one president in about the same time.

Then, maybe either Clinton or Obama can stop running for the chance to be the next name in a long line of Democratic losers, and be the first woman or the first African American President.

Why I Voted for Hillary

I just got back from my local polling place. This is the first time in memory that I am able to cast a vote for President that actually matters. Having voted in Texas or Maryland since 1986, I haven't cast many votes in races where the winner isn't known days beforehand.

But up until this morning, I didn't know which way to vote. Both Clinton and Obama are terrific candidates, and would make great presidents. Each has flaws, but I'm confident that each would put their considerable talents to work fixing the problems created by eight years of Bush and Cheney.

I finally decided on Hillary for several reasons. Here are the biggest three:

Healthcare. Both Democrats realize that Americans are hurting when it comes to healthcare. We spend more per capita than any other country, and yet 47 million Americans go without health insurance. Most of those are regular working men and women and their children. But unlike Republicans, who have little interest in fixing the problem, both Clinton and Obama have pretty elaborate plans for reforming the system. Neither plan goes as far as I'd like them to, and both plans have been criticized. Obama's plan would still leave 15 million uninsured, and Clinton's plan would mandate coverage, forcing people to take coverage even if they didn't want to. But both plans would allow health insurance to be portable, would pool private plans and create an alternative Medicare-style public plan. And both would pay for it by repealing the tax breaks that Bush gave to households making more than $250,000 per year.

The difference is not with the plans, but in the person who will have to drive them through Congress and sign them into law. Hillary is passionate about healthcare. It was her most public failure during her husband's administration, and it was one of the first issues she grabbed in this campaign. She knows from experienced the size, strength, and tactics of her opposition, from the entrenched fatcats who are growing rich from the status quo. And she won't rest until we have a plan in place to try to fix the system. It may not be perfect, but it's a far sight better than what we have now.

Iraq. Obama mentions at every opportunity that he was right on Iraq, and Hillary was wrong. But we're past the decision to go to war. We're even past the decision to bring troops home. Both Democrats have made it, and unless "Hundred Years" McCain wins the election, they'll be coming home soon after one of them takes office. But while Obama's wants them out in a year or so, save a few non-combat troops, Hillary knows that it will take much longer. There are more than 140,000 troops over there, but there are also more than 100,000 contractors, and a zillion tanks, troop trucks, planes, jeeps, and pieces of equipment that we have to bring back. To bring everyone and everything back will take time, and a year won't do it. Plus, she's allowing the generals to set the timetable, not the rest of us. As a key member of the Senate Arms Services Committee, she knows what the military needs, and can do. She has made a commitment to ending the war in Iraq, but she isn't about to get into a race to see how fast she can get everybody out. She will take a slow, organized approach, trying not to further destabilize the region. Liberals will be scratching their heads wondering why it is taking so long, but I'd feel much better about this approach.

Republicans. The third reason isn't really an issue. It's more a feeling I get when I examine both of these candidates. Obama is running on two words: change and unity. He wants to change the country by changing Washington. And how will he change Washington? That's where the unity comes in. Democrats are more alike than different, and there is really no need for all of the acrimony and harshness. Obama is clearly uninterested in going to war with Republicans; he wants to lead the whole country. "I don't want to pit Red America against Blue America," he said early in the campaign. "I want to be President of the United States of America."
Contrast that to Hillary Clinton, the Most Hates Women in country clubs and NASCAR events everywhere. She's never going to unite the country. She's never going to get Republicans to work with her. And that's fine with me.
There are two ways to get something done in Washington: compromise or win. And for the first time in a long time, we actually have a chance to win. With a Dem in the White House and solid majorities in the House and Senate, we have a chance to reverse some of the damage of the Bush Era. We have a chance to get some control over the defecit, to take some real action for the environment, and to lower the widening gap between rich and poor. Not to mention healthcare and Iraq. But we don't need a coalition-builder in the White House for that; we need a fighter. We need someone to say, "I heard the jokes. I know what you're thinking. I know that you can't stand my being here. But I'm here now, so deal with it. And maybe in four years, your party will put you here. Unless you're a Mormon, that is."

Only she won't be, of course. She won't be President. Not this year, and probably not ever. Today may be the last real day of her campaign, or maybe the last week, or the last month. But the handwriting is on the wall. Even with the superdelegates, even with 65% of the rest of the pledged delegates, even if they re-run Florida and Michigan, it won't be enough. It won't be enough to overcome the national movement that will lead to the first black man to be nominated for President, and not the first woman. But I'm fine with it. Sort of.