Hillary and the money factor
April 20th 2008 22:44
Hillary Clinton, who is still trailing Barack Obama in total votes, states won, and pledged delegates, has vowed to stay in the Democratic race all the way to the convention. While Obama is leading the race in national polls, it is still close in most of them. The daily Gallup tracking poll actually had Clinton leading Obama as recently as two days ago. And, by most accounts, she is expected to win the upcoming primary in Pennsylvania (a large and vitally important state for Democrats). These circumstances help to provide her with a rationale for staying in the race.
On top of that, you must remember that this contest is no longer about the average voter. Neither Clinton nor Obama can win this race on the basis of pledged delegates. No, this race will be decided by the superdelegates. As such, Hillary's primary goal now is to convince undecided superdelegates that she is the better choice for the party in November. If she can hold on and if Obama makes some mistakes, she feels she can make the case to those superdelegates that Obama is not ready for prime time. She knows that the party establishment wants a victory above all else. If they get the feeling that Obama is the weaker of the two candidates, they could very well hand the victory over to Hillary. That would be a dangerous move, though, because doing so would essentially overturn the will of the people. However, winning is everything. If Obama looks like he can't win in November, Hillary could get the nod.
With all that being said, is there anything that could knock Hillary out of the race before the convention? Well, the only factor I see that could possibly bring her down is money. Hillary, while having raised enormous sums of money, is still losing badly to Obama on that front. Obama is awash in cash and that allows him to put more ads on the air and put more "boots on the ground". An article in today's New York Times illustrates how this is a problem for Hillary:
And this is not the first hint of money troubles for Hillary. A recent Polico.com article noted that Hillary Clinton's campaign had been failing to pay some of its bills:
Certainly, candidates can run campaigns on shoestring budgets and do pretty well. Mike Huckabee comes to mind. Hillary's camp doesn't appear to an expert at frugality, though. If Hillary's main goal is to convince superdelegates that she is the better choice for the Democratic presidential nomination, a big fundraising disadvantage isn't exactly a compelling argument. As the Supreme Court has famously ruled, campaign donations are a form of free speech -- and the supporters of Obama are speaking very loudly. Also, if Hillary can't properly manage her campaign's finances, how can she be expected to help guide our nation through the economic difficulties she would almost certainly inherit as president?
Could Hillary's money troubles knock her out of the race? Honestly, I doubt it. I do believe she'll hold on. However, her money problems have made her task even harder. They may not give Obama a knockout victory, but their presence will almost certainly be felt on the scorecards when they winner is announced after the final bell.
On top of that, you must remember that this contest is no longer about the average voter. Neither Clinton nor Obama can win this race on the basis of pledged delegates. No, this race will be decided by the superdelegates. As such, Hillary's primary goal now is to convince undecided superdelegates that she is the better choice for the party in November. If she can hold on and if Obama makes some mistakes, she feels she can make the case to those superdelegates that Obama is not ready for prime time. She knows that the party establishment wants a victory above all else. If they get the feeling that Obama is the weaker of the two candidates, they could very well hand the victory over to Hillary. That would be a dangerous move, though, because doing so would essentially overturn the will of the people. However, winning is everything. If Obama looks like he can't win in November, Hillary could get the nod.
With all that being said, is there anything that could knock Hillary out of the race before the convention? Well, the only factor I see that could possibly bring her down is money. Hillary, while having raised enormous sums of money, is still losing badly to Obama on that front. Obama is awash in cash and that allows him to put more ads on the air and put more "boots on the ground". An article in today's New York Times illustrates how this is a problem for Hillary:
Senator Barack Obama is swamping Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton with television advertising in their prolonged battle for the Democratic nomination, putting fresh pressure on Mrs. Clinton’s fund-raising machine to find new sources of money to help her keep pace.
But her big-dollar fund-raising apparatus that was once the envy of the political world is encountering obstacles as many of those in its regular networks of donors have reached the maximum on their personal contributions or grown tired of the relentless press for donations.
But her big-dollar fund-raising apparatus that was once the envy of the political world is encountering obstacles as many of those in its regular networks of donors have reached the maximum on their personal contributions or grown tired of the relentless press for donations.
And this is not the first hint of money troubles for Hillary. A recent Polico.com article noted that Hillary Clinton's campaign had been failing to pay some of its bills:
Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months — freeing up cash for critical media buys but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small-business circles.
Certainly, candidates can run campaigns on shoestring budgets and do pretty well. Mike Huckabee comes to mind. Hillary's camp doesn't appear to an expert at frugality, though. If Hillary's main goal is to convince superdelegates that she is the better choice for the Democratic presidential nomination, a big fundraising disadvantage isn't exactly a compelling argument. As the Supreme Court has famously ruled, campaign donations are a form of free speech -- and the supporters of Obama are speaking very loudly. Also, if Hillary can't properly manage her campaign's finances, how can she be expected to help guide our nation through the economic difficulties she would almost certainly inherit as president?
Could Hillary's money troubles knock her out of the race? Honestly, I doubt it. I do believe she'll hold on. However, her money problems have made her task even harder. They may not give Obama a knockout victory, but their presence will almost certainly be felt on the scorecards when they winner is announced after the final bell.
| 59 |
| Vote |
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
How exactly did the Democrats managed to invent "super delegates" and what is their purpose (except to overturn the will of the voters)? Is there someting in the Constitution that permits it? And if so, why now and not years ago? And why did only the Democrats do it? Do you think this will be the form our elections will be taking from now on? It's a scary notion...
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate
Here is a Wiki explanation: Superdelegate
Ironically, this was their goal:
Boy, could they have missed the mark any more than they did? They were trying to keep the primary voters and leaders from hijacking the party, but they created a superclass of delegates that is unaccountable and overly powerful.
I'd be surprised if the concept of the superdelegate is around in 2012. It has been very roundly criticized.
I assume it's constitutional, but I don't know for sure. I think the constitution allows a lot of flexibility for parties to work it out themselves.
Personally, I don't think the GOP does it because they aren't as scared of their base (as indicated by their willingness to live with the decision made by state primaries). I think the Democrats are (or, at least, were) worried about the more radical elements of the primary and caucus system hoisting an unacceptable candidate on them.
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate