(Danville, California)
In politics it's always interesting to speculate, especially on "what might have been." There has been a lot of chatter this past week about whether John Edwards and his affair might have cost Hillary Clinton the nomination.
The theory works like this: Had the press reported the suspected affair (and it now appears some mainstream news outlets knew about it), then Edwards would have been forced to drop out, even before the Iowa caucuses. The theory further postulates that Clinton would have picked up most of Edwards's supporters, launching her past Obama. My analysis of this consists of yes; no; and maybe.
YES: Obama was clearly the most liberal of the three candidates, with Edwards and Clinton operating more to his right. In addition, Clinton could have picked up on Edwards's appeal to rural and white Southern voters, a constituency she did well with in later primaries. But would it have helped her in Iowa?
NO: Some are making the assumption that white voters who backed Edwards would have simply shifted over to Clinton because she is white. This is a bad assumption and - quite honestly - not very deep political analysis. To assume everything is race-based is a mistake. After all, Obama won Iowa, a state that is 97 percent white.
You also have to look at a candidate's negatives. Some people were turned off by Hillary simply because of "Clinton fatigue." Her husband had his eight years, and now it was time to move on to someone else in the party. Obama was the candidate of "change," a word that really resonated. Edwards also ran as a Washington outsider who was going to shake things up. Had Edward dropped out early, it's plausible a lot of those "change" voters would have gone to Obama, not Clinton, especially those voters under 30.
MAYBE: Still, I am realist. Iowa was NOT a landslide by any means. The final count was: Obama 37.6 percent; Edwards 29.7 percent; and Clinton 29.5 percent. Remove Edwards, and Hillary would have finished a much closer second at the very least. She was an upset winner in New Hampshire, and that gave her candidacy more life and momentum. Had she won both Iowa and New Hampshire, her campaign would have had that air of inevitability that she so badly wanted. That momentum might have caused a better result for her on Super Tuesday, sealing the deal.
The problem is, we'll never know. We spend a lot of time speculating in politics. If only there weren't voting irregularities in Illinois in 1960, Nixon would have won; if only Ross Perot didn't run in 1992, Bush Sr. would have been re-elected; if only Ralph Nader hadn't run in 2000, Al Gore might be President today. The list could go on.My point is, what's done is done. There aren't any "do overs" in politics (and indeed in most of life). We are simply left to wonder.
My "all new" blog is coming soon! Keep checking in for details at www.MarkCurtisMedia.blogspot.com.
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.
No comments:
Post a Comment