The two establishment candidates won yesterday: McCain in South Carolina, Clinton in Nevada.
McCain won by appealing to those who want to continue the war indefinitely. Clinton won by subtly using the race and gender cards and by taking advantage of Obama's "Reagan" statement.
Both candidates supported the war in Iraq and both will preserve the status quo here at home and in Iraq more than any of the other candidates. Both, therefore, are not a threat to corporate America, nor the best hope for restoring the prosperity of the middle class or America's reputation in the world. If you doubt that they are the establishment candidates, just watch what kind of coverage they get by the establishment media, compared to the coverage the other candidates get. It is subtle, but it is real. The press loves McCain and has not, to my knowledge, reported anything negative about him. And while the press dislikes Clinton, they have given her more coverage than most other candidates. With Hillary Clinton, even negative coverage energizes her many female supporters, who see the press as unfair to her because she's a woman.
Some things to consider as we move forward:
A Clinton – McCain race would be very bad for the peace movement and for any hope of removing our troops from Iraq any time soon.
Despite my hopes, and the hopes of many, that this election might well prove that a black candidate could win a major party nomination and the presidential election, I fear we will find by February 5th that a black candidate still is not viable.
As much as she may be counting on the above fact as she savors her win in Nevada, I fear Hillary Clinton will soon find that a woman candidate is still not viable.
We are also learning that a libertarian is not viable, a populist is not viable, and will soon learn that a Mormon is not viable.
If the race continues to elevate McCain and Clinton as the candidates of the major parties, there will be contemplation of vice presidential picks and this could be the most important decision made by the candidates.
In order to win evangelical votes, McCain may have to choose Huckabee. With McCain's age and health problems, Huckabee could very well become president before the end of McCain's term. I can think of few people less qualified for the presidency, except of course for George W. Bush, who could be Huckabee's equal in that category. And we all know what a disaster that has been.
Hillary Clinton, for her part, will probably pick Bill Richardson, or some other dutiful and loyal Clintonite. She will never pick Obama for a number of reasons, not least of which is the bad blood that is increasing between them, mostly because of her campaign's tactics and her husband's statements. Furthermore, as Bill will undoubtedly be her most trusted advisor and the de facto vice president, any man (and it will be a man) who accepts the bid will have to accept that and be content to stay in the background. Obama would not do well in that position – he is too much of a leader and has too many ambitions himself.
A final note on the effect of a vice presidential pick on the Clinton campaign. Anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton will get a lot of men to vote for her in the general election is not counting on the effect of seeing Clinton in the top spot and a man in a subservient position on the ticket. This will not sit well with many men, especially republicans and independents who might otherwise vote democratic this year. It might not even go over well with some democrats. I hate to admit that, but it is a real possibility.
I'm not ready to count Obama out just yet. I counted Clinton out after Iowa and that was obviously premature. But things are looking like they are leaning Clinton's way. She and her husband are running a campaign that knows how to win, even with tactics that were once used against them. Look how easily they shifted from an unsuccessful strategy of "inevitability" to a more successful strategy of "come from behind." They publicly prepared for a loss in New Hampshire, thus emerging as the "surprise" victor (this gets tons of press), and then made it appear Obama would win in Nevada with those "unfair" casino caucuses, making Hillary's win all the more miraculous. And the former president's angry and undignified outbursts before every election only seem to galvanize Hillary's support.
A McCain vs. Clinton general election, which appears increasingly likely, will generate much destruction. As mentioned above, the peace movement will be dealt a serious blow. The middle class will lose, as corporate America continues to enrich itself at their expense. And the two minorities who had great hopes of finally achieving the presidency this year could be big, big losers.
If Obama loses the nomination, it is liable to be a long time before an African American has another opportunity to be the party nominee, unless the next presidency is a disaster and Obama comes back in 2012. In addition, the Clinton campaign has pitted Latino voters against African American voters, two essential democratic constituencies. It will be hard to heal this in time for the general election, or even over the next four years.
And if Hillary Clinton is the nominee and loses to John McCain in the general, women will be dealt a huge setback in their quest to elect a woman president. If such a powerful and high profile woman cannot win the presidency against a 71 year old man, what woman can? You can bet the democrats will not nominate a woman for a good long time.
What started out as hope for a transformative election, may turn out to be no different than every other election. With the press solidly behind him (they love McCain and hate Clinton) the establishment candidate (white, male, pro-corporation, anti-people) will probably win, and the rest of us will lose.
There will be no fresh ideas for reforming health care, no wise course in foreign policy, no return to a progressive tax structure, and the guarantee of an increasingly divided country. The same old pro-free market, anti regulation, raise the deficit, fund endless war economics will continue and we are likely to suffer more recessions.
I really hope I'm wrong.
