The State of the Democratic Party Presidential Race: There is a season to the ebb and flow in public life and mood
Write-up by Gurumurthy Kalyanaram
Senator Hillary Clinton is struggling to maintain her democratic nomination alive these days though she was the overwhelming preferred just 3 months back — in December 2007.
The explanation for this basic: Senator Clinton’s almost-excellent certitude in December 2007 that she would prevail. That certitude was reasonable by most objective measures. Senator Clinton did not come to that conclusion lightly. She came to that conclusion following evaluating her competitors — Senator Barack Obama (lack of national exposure and celebration network) and former Vice-Presidential Candidate John Edwards (has been there currently and not succeeded, not a fresh face, a bit too populist) — and soon after assessing her very own strengths (experience, understanding, party network.)
Objectively, any external consultant would have agreed with Senator Clinton’s evaluation of the political landscape as it appeared in December 2007.
As anticipated, John Edwards put up a spirited battle, and then suspended his campaign. But Senator Barack Obama’s surprising and resilient strength is just that — most surprising.
Even so, in public life, each and every now and then a candidate who is in almost-full sync with the public mood emerges, and he/she captures the imagination (e.g, Reagan in 1980 right after failing to connect in 1968, and practically succeeding in 1976.) Normally, there are several institutional speed bumps to this kind of a sweep (e.g., Gary Hart in 1984.)
That is what we uncover with Senator Obama’s success this time — he has captured the broad sweep of imagination of at least the Democratic Party voters, and he is operating into several speed bumps but none of them has (however) derailed him.
Senator Hillary Clinton, nor any a single such as Senator Obama, could have anticipated this. Nor could any poll have captured this — it is like asking consumers about wine-coolers when they have no concept what it is.
That is the stuff of public mood and public life. There is a season for things, and very often we don’t control those flows. Senator Obama himself acknowledges and understands this (“fierece urgency of now” quoting Dr. King) — he may not match the public sentiment in the next season, he does now.
In spite of Senator Barack Obama’s surprising strength, Senator Clinton could have nonetheless, possibly, won the Democratic Celebration nomination but her effectively-placed self-confidence and certitude led to two tactical misjudgments that are now costing her so dearly.
The two misjudgments are: (i) not competing in celebration caucuses vigorously (among the pledged delegates from the primaries, Senator Clinton trails only by about 20 pledged delegates but when you aspect the caucus benefits, Senator Clinton trails by above 150 pledged delegates) and (ii) not carrying out adequate due diligence about the Democratic Celebration guidelines, and absorbing and internalizing these guidelines for appropriate technique execution [e.g., believing that victory in big states really should present the numbers (not so since of proportional representation rules), not absorbing the Texas dual system.]
That’s the way life is often. Timing (and some might call it luck or providence) is such a determinant in life. Just as Bill Clinton was smart (or lucky) in taking a pass at the 1988 Presidential elections and equally sensible (or lucky) in joining the fray in 1992, Senator Hillary Clinton’s time might have been 2004 or it may possibly be 2012 or 2016.
It seems from all standard metrics that the mood of the electorate favors the Democratic nominee in fall but who actually knows? No poll can measure this.
{ 0 comments }