Democratic soap opera

The primary campaign is getting uglier by the day. Here is an excellent update from the Economist website.

I’ve already floated a question about how low Hillary would go in this campaign. She has squandered her chances of a comfortable victory over her Democratic rival, mostly be underestimating Obama’s ability to convert words into votes. And as the race has seemed to slip from her grasp, she has gone increasingly on the offensive. Many now expect the race to go to the wire, i.e. to the national convention in Denver. Some commentators have suggested that Hillary would ‘go nuclear’ and blow the chances of her party winning in November if she isn’t going to become the nominee. I don’t quite see it that way, since by bringing down her party she would wreck her chances of becoming Senate Majority leader at a future date.

We will see. What certainly is true, is that the race has become like one of those American TV shows that lie somewhere beyween drama and soap opera (I was thinking here of the 80s show, LA Law), with frequent power plays in the form of below the belt comments and attempts at seriously undermining the personal credibility of a rival.

The Economist writes:

“The nastiness has already begun. Samantha Power, an unofficial Obama adviser, had to quit after calling Mrs Clinton a “monster” in a newspaper interview. But more of the ugly stuff has come from the other side. Mrs Clinton has suggested, in an ad and in her comments, that she is ready to be commander-in-chief, as is the Republican nominee-to-be, John McCain, but that Mr Obama is not. Her spokesman compared Mr Obama to Ken Starr, whose investigations of the Clintons in the 1990s made him a hate-figure among Democrats. And last week, a newspaper printed comments by Geraldine Ferraro, a prominent supporter of Mrs Clinton, that are angering blacks, hitherto a solid Democratic-voting block.

Mrs Ferraro, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate in 1984, said that Mr Obama was only where he was in the race because he was black. Race being as ticklish a subject as it is in America, most politicians would retreat and praise Mr Obama when such comments caused a stir. Instead Mrs Ferraro said that the outcry made her a victim of reverse racism. A spokesman for Mrs Clinton has said only that she “disagrees” with Mrs Ferraro’s comments. The Obama team asks why, if Ms Power had to quit, Mrs Clinton does not disown Mrs Ferraro. And if she doesn’t, Mr Obama’s supporters may lash out in frustration.

A campaign that degenerates into name-calling and mud-slinging will hurt Mr Obama more than it does Mrs Clinton. He has campaigned on messages of “change” and “hope” so he faces an unenviable choice in the long run-up to Pennsylvania. If he lets the Clinton team fling the brickbats without retaliation she may set the tone of the campaign. But respond in kind and his message of a new politics is tarnished. Even though he is behind there in the polls, Pennsylvania cannot come soon enough for Mr Obama.”