All eyes on Pennsylvania and creating the Democratic juggernaut

[illusionofjoy]

With Hillary Clinton's wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island last week, all eyes have turned towards Pennsylvania, the next big prize to be won. Chock full of delegates, a win in Pennsylvania would further close the current delegate gap between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. At this point, it is mathematically impossible for either candidate to win the magic number of 2,024 standard delegates and mathematically improbable that will make any delegate gains which serve to do anything besides create a tie.

The Clinton campaign will get a big win in Pennsylvania. Unlike many other states, only Democrats are allowed to vote in the Democratic primary. Many Obama votes have come from Independents (otherwise known as "people who lack conviction and focus"). Obama will easily capture the black vote in Philadelphia, but working for Clinton is the fact that the vast majority of the state is made up of the working class, her bread and butter. Philly may have the Obamaheads, but I predict that Pittsburgh, Erie, Scranton and Harrisburg will be Clinton country.

An endorsement for Hillary Clinton by Governor Ed Rendell doesn't hurt either.

What the Clinton campaign needs to do now, while focusing on the big prize that is Pennsylvania, is to not forget about the other states who have primaries before the big day on April 22^nd. Part of Clinton's current problem in trailing Obama in the delegate count is the fact that she did not campaign enough in the eleven states where Obama won a majority before "Super Tuesday II." Instead, she focused her efforts on larger states with more hefty delegate counts. I'm surprised that she made such an error, given the fact that during her 2000 run for New York senate, she visited every single county in the state, while her opponent, Rick Lazio, stubbornly held to his belief that New York ended just a few miles outside the borders of Albany's northmost suburbs (in reality, it is a four hour drive to get to the Canadian border from Albany, New York). This concentrated effort to get into every nook and cranny of New York served well to hand her a decisive victory in 2000.

It's too late to campaign in the eleven states won by Obama between "Super Tuesdays," however, Clinton can regain some lost ground by campaigning in Wyoming prior to their March 8^th caucus and in Mississippi prior to their March 11^th primary. While it is unlikely that she will grab a majority of the delegates (there are 45 total up for grabs between the two states), a visit by her to both could close the gap and, if nothing else, would serve as a good faith gesture on her part.

Then she can come to Pennsylvania.

There are 158 delegates up for grabs in Pennsylvania - the only other state with that kind of prize afterwards is North Carolina with 115 (their primary is on May 6^th). In the weeks leading up to the primary, it will be a circus of campaign pandering and vote-begging in this state from both the Clinton and Obama camps. Chelsea and Bill Clinton have already visited Philadelphia in an attempt to loosen the Obama stranglehold over the city. Meanwhile, my email in-box has been inundated with messages from the Obama camp and his supporters urging me to help "make history in Pennsylvania," which I will already be doing by choosing the first female President of the United States. Thus far the Clinton camp has been kinder to my email in-box, only sending a message about the momentum garnered by the wins of the past few primaries and thanking me for past donations (while urging me to part with more of my hard-earned cash). Full disclosure: I own $5 of Obama's campaign and $35 of Hillary Clinton's.

Since I am what the media calls a "decided voter," I will likely be ignoring pleas from both camps to press their name on the Diebold touchscreen. Unless Hillary Clinton were to go on national television and eat a baby (no jokes from the dittoheads, please), there's not much either she or Obama could do to change my mind to sway my vote.

My thoughts are turning towards what will happen when the Democratic National Convention occurs in August. There is no doubt that the "Superdelegates" will come into play because 1.) neither Clinton or Obama will reach the magic delegate number of 2,024 and 2.) neither candidate is going to drop out of the race. Regarding my second point, it is my opinion that neither candidate should drop out of the race.

Superdelegates, of course, do not have to follow the popular vote. This troubles me - while I want Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic nomination, I want it to be a clean win. I do not want her installed as the nominee because of some sort of backroom deal. Obama supporters should feel the same way. While it isn't technically against the rules for superdelegates to vote against the will of the people, it is unethical. Each superdelegate should follow the voting pattern of their state, allowing whomever garners the majority of the popular vote to win the majority of the superdelegate vote as well. While supporters of the losing camp will surely be disappointed by the results, this would be the fair way to determine the nominee and would prevent the justified rage which would ensue from backroom shenanigans.

There still may be a rift, however, as many supporters in each camp have vowed to not vote if their candidate isn't the nominee, or worse, vote republican (completely forgetting the point that the republican party is the true enemy which must be defeated). This type of thinking is asinine, of course, but people tend to be stubborn. So, an eloquent solution to this problem is for Clinton and Obama to join forces.

Before the Democratic primaries even started, many dreamed of a Clinton/Obama ticket. I'm not convinced that it isn't possible - and I'm not the only one. In an article originally from the Huffington Post, Shaun Jacob Halper expresses the idea quite well:

The majority of the Democratic electorate has spoken, yet neither Obama nor Hillary seems to comprehend: Democrats want them both. Contrary to the specious assertions spun by spinsters from both sides, neither candidate will secure a majority of delegates or votes to truly claim an exclusive victory over the other. Hillary's second comeback is, like her first, not an index of "buyer's remorse," but an expression of a base excited with and committed to both of its choices. Even if one candidate manages to marginally eke out a diminutive delegate advantage, the fight will rage on over superdelegates and the Gordian knot that is Michigan and Florida. When a compromise is eventually brokered in Denver, Hillary and Obama may very well be forced to join a dream-ticket anyway -- why then prolong the inevitable, alienating each other's support while risking defeat, when a secure bulwark can be established today?

Halper points out in his article that by joining forces, Clinton and Obama would consolidate their considerable but diverse bases. Furthermore, he points out that no matter who has the top billing, the Vice Presidential candidate would find him or herself in a very good position to end up contender for President in 2016.

There are many people who would argue that such a thing would never happen. "They hate each other" is the popular retread. I don't buy it; I think all of their arguments and so-called attacks (which, frankly, have all been softballs) are wonderful examples of political theatre which ultimately add up to nothing in the long run. Assuming that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama truly care about the future of America, there is no reason they wouldn't pledge to choose or be the running mate for the other no matter how the nomination turns out. A Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket would energise the Democratic party, not just in the upcoming election, but for years to come. And if Clinton ends up as the Vice President, think of how we liberals can bask in the schadenfreude of watching right-winger's heads explode at the thought of Hillary having direct access to the White House for 24 years!

In any case, no matter what happens, the next several months - the next several weeks - should prove interesting. Hopefully that won't end up becoming "living in interesting times."