If Politics Truly Was Sport

If politics truly is a sport then why is everyone screaming for Hillary to get out of the race before the final second ticks down on the clock?

Watching the Sunday talk shows this morning, the message was hammered home again and again and again: she's hurting the party by continuing to run. Even though Obama hasn't wrapped it up yet with the clinching vote?

Imagine the outcry were Eric Wedge to just decide what the hell, Joba's too good a pitcher so why even duke it out one more inning if the Indians are a run behind the Yankees?

For that matter, why should the Blue Jays yesterday continue to even play the game after coughing up six runs in the first inning en route to the Tribe's crushing 12-zip win? They continue to play because that's what they do -- and it's a nine inning game unless the home team is winning after eight and a half or if the score is tied after regulation.

Given the thought from the political talking heads Sunday, one would think it would be OK for LeBron to tell the rest of the James Gang that it really doesn't make sense to drag everyone out to the Q for a pair of games. For the good of the NBA, let's just hand it to the Celtics so they can move on to eventually playing Kobe and the Lakers and everyone can wax poetic about the Bird v Magic years.

But that's not the way the game is played; in the NBA the final two minutes of the game often provide the most compelling action of the entire game, and we still have three weeks to go before the Democratic Party appoints a nominees (at least in name only; that actually will happen in Denver this summer.)

Is Obama cruising along to a win? Sure, even the most rabid Clinton fans have to admit the O-line is chugging along with momentum. But it's not over until the Lady sings goodnight, and Hillary still has three weeks to prove some of her points and make sure she's positioned her side well for the next race should she get the chance. She's not where she is because she's a quitter and like her or not she understands much better than the experts who aren't putting their names on the ballot what it takes to run the race.

She's not John Edwards with a couple of dozen votes going up against hundreds; she's the second biggest stick in the lineup with a batting average pretty close to number one. History shows that while the batting champ gets the glory that season the one that gets into the Hall of Fame is the one who keeps swinging the big bat consistently over a career.

Is Being Anti-Hillary Anti-Woman?

I've been giving this more thought than normal (memo to my more-youthful-by-the-day pal Diana: hold chuckle here, please) after today's media maelstrom following Hillary Clinton's "mis-speak" about a trip to Bosnia a dozen years ago. In the event you missed it -- YouTube's loaded chock-full of reports and clip postings from the CBS News coverage since the network dug up it's original footage to show the Senator's memory had a few holes in it. Of course, in today's computer age, that means everyone has video -- including this posting.



Why this comes to mind today is the conversation I had with some friends and fellow professionals in the communications business as we met the other night, performing our duties as screening judges for scholarships awarded to aspiring journalists. Among those present: two dudes and three ladies. My friend Sarah feels a loss by Clinton means a huge setback for the chances of a woman ever becoming President, which spurred a quick debate.

Is it really anti-woman to be anti-Hillary?

Sarah argues Hillary has to overcome the voters who won't vote for a woman, no matter who she is. I argue the decision in 2008 has as much, if not more, to do with Clinton's position as such a polarizing political force and that her candidacy actually clears the way for other women to succeed. Would voter reaction be just as swift and negative, for example, to an Elizabeth Dole (who can argue more executive experience at the cabinet level and while CEO of the Red Cross?) or a Kay Bailey Hutchinson among the Republicans? What about high-profile campaigning Governors Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS), Jennifer Granholm (D-MI), Janet Napolitano (D-AZ) or the five other women top state executives who merged politics with experience as a CEO to win?
Switch the argument to race and chief executives of color show an even wider margin in terms of representation, a far wider chasm in representative politics than the gender gap.

Characterizing a no vote for Hillary as one solely based on chauvinism is a dangerous thing; is the parallel then to demand the litmus test for women in power needs to be this line in the sand of Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign for President? By this reckoning voters of African-American heritage are traitors for not voting for Obama; the same can be held true for Hispanic-Americans not holding bigger sway for Richardson. Does that mean McCain wins the United Kingdom roots by default? By this logic winning an election truly is a numbers game where only more seasoned (read: elderly) white candidates should win since that is the biggest block of voters heading to the polls. Where does this end?

The hope should be that each candidate -- all candidates -- are weighed not by gender, race, religion or age but because we think she or he will do the best job, as defined by what we think most important when we step into the booth.

Earlier Clinton family campaigns rode to victory on the strategy "it's the economy, stupid." Modern campaigns should take a page from that strategy and admit "it's the person, dummy" that build the foundation for what voters consider worthy of filling in the circle on Election Day.

Political Suck-Up

Tick Tick Tick...only hours, really, as the campaigns try to convince us they are our only hope. I'd normally says this is what separates the men from the boys but that's a tad bit outdated...

Chelsea brings a busload of Hillaristas to the University of Akron campus to showcase the "Women for Change Tour", all the big guns they can muster for that one last push in what is geographically the center of the Northeast Ohio war for the Democratic Presidential Nomination (DPN). It'll be interesting to see the contrast from Obama's six-thousand strong standing-in-the-cold crowd a week ago at the convention center named after Akron's most illustrious First Amendment journalist. Will it showcase his best appearance to win the hearts and minds on a campaign built on our jobs and wallets?

Bill Clinton came through the area today as part of the DPN push for Hillary; the campaign won't admit it but it is clear to the naked eye his contribution has been better relegated to smaller, more intimate events -- or they just wanted to avoid any repeat of South Carolina or that quickie quote ABC's Charlie Gibson pointed out a week ago, telling Hillary supporters Obama hasn't really been part of anything good in the recent past. Today the FFH (future or former First Husband based on how the vote turns out Tuesday) visited Wayne County and New Philadelphia as part of his tour along Routes 224 and 30 through the Heart of it All; four days to go and the best the ex-President gets is south of the voter-heavy snowbelt? What a difference three months make since those snows of Iowa...

Obama is holding another Town Hall meeting, of all places in Parma, a city with a rick history of not seeing there really isn't a difference between black and white on so many levels. It is a hotbed of Democrat politics (to be a Republican in Parma is living in Seven Hills) and Hillary's best support has some from older Democrats, according to some of the demographic analysis of Ohio voters we've seen. Will he outdraw the First Daughter and FFH?

Best voting bribe so far: Eat'n Park is offering free coffee to anyone sporting an "I voted" sticker Tuesday. A voting stub will work, too if you remember to ask for one.

Back Home -- And Voting

Yes, it's been an extended hiatus away from the blog keypad for yours truly, as my friend Diana Keough in Atlanta (formerly The Plain Dealer) so kindly reminded me over pasta and salad during lunch last week. Those newspaper people -- deadlines, always deadlines! I must note, however, that Southern living agrees with her; she looks younger!

Random thoughts:

- I took advantage of the early voting in Summit County today (it would be cheating to say who) but one thing struck me as potentially confusing for some: when you cast your votes for your favorite Presidential candidate, note you are choosing delegates to the national convention. It isn't exactly rocket science to figure it out but I wouldn't be surprised if some were distracted because they're just looking for a "vote for this candidate for President" line instead of choosing delegates to the convention.

- that said, what a Godsend early voting is! At last report over the weekend 15,000 were expected with 10 days to go and folks at the Board of Elections (all smiles and helpful, by the way-- good job!) told me they figure the crush will really be on when the weather gets better and more people figure out they can do their duty today without worrying about a week from now.

- flying into Atlanta last week I was struck by all the empty truck shipping depots on the arrival into the airport runway zone, but of course the rest of Atlanta seems like an orgasm of construction cranes, highway expansion and economic development. How unlike Northeast Ohio.

- three days away from the phone where every surrogate, public interest group or soul with an opinion has been calling to pitch their piece of wisdom on WAKR. It is a wonderful reminder of how incredibly narcissistic one must be to run for office, or at least their campaigns. That old practice of making sure there was a slave in Caesar's carriage whispering how fame and fortune are fleeting should be required personnel for any candidate.

- speaking of why you aren't hearing the former Deputy Assistant Undersecretary for Development of Underwater Resources on the air waxing poetic about Hillary/Barack/John/Mike, it's been our practice to require candidates to actually speak for themselves first before we open the floodgates to all those well-meaning folks who want to speak on their behalf. This has worked well in limiting the "spin" on our station to real voters with an opinion rather than the professional campaign apparatus. In 2004 John Kerry was the only candidate to speak with us; maybe that's why the others just send invitations to these canned photo ops posing as a campaign voters can use.

- watching all the fervor of this week's TV ads (and hearing them on the radio as well) reminds me how wimpy we've become as a nation when it comes to truly hardball politics; Hillary goes off on Barack because he says she loved NAFTA once but now scorns it because she's running for President this time (instead of her husband, who followed up Bush 41's lead and got NAFTA passed way back before it became organized labor's rallying cry.) This is hardball? This stuff draws tears, sharp breaths, and angry fist-shaking? Too bad Andrew Jackson's not around to recount suffering bigamy charges, Grover Cleveland's to recount smears over his alleged illegitimate child, or even Ohio's Warren Harding to discuss the Shadow of Blooming Grove whispered racial lineage to show 'em some real dirty politics.

What's really counting for me on this eve of what we hope will be the final Democratic Presidential Debate: the YouTube vote. Obama Girl's got it running away, more than six million views to Hot4Hill's less than 1.3 million.



Here's what you've been missing from the pro-Hillary video:



And with that I figure Diana will be glad the next time I go two weeks without a post.

Does Ohio Matter?

Sitting here watching the New Hampshire results:

- listening to the McCain supporters chant "Michigan, Michigan" will anyone be chanting for Ohio in March? We're two months away and in just a month "Super Duper Tuesday" may very well signal this whole thing is over with California and New York's rich plums still to be plundered;

- I'm struck by just how much everybody loves New Hampshire and I'm wondering just how many return as President (or otherwise) for a vacation? Do any of these professional-class politicians spend a day or two on a color tour in the fall without asking someone for a vote?

- With all the discussion on experience v change this popped in my mind: if you buy the argument the Clinton camp is making then shouldn't you be supportive of the son of a two-term Vice President and one-term President, the guy who was elected Governor of one of the nation's most populous and growing states, the fellow with degrees not only from Harvard but also Yale? If being the spouse with a ringside seat means you're more experienced than the candidate with more time spent actually serving in elected office then what's the weight of the second generation who actually served as a state's executive?

- with just about half of the precincts reporting from the Granite State it's a close race between Hillary and Obama...so did the softer, choking-back-tears work? Polls showed she was ten points down before "the moment" and voters may well decide she's human, too and the exit polling has women coming out for Clinton as they were supposed to in Iowa but the voting is still being tallied without big counts coming in from college-age voters;

- on CNN the pundits are really couching their conventional wisdom by saying even if she wins she loses because she had a big lead...but also she should be seen as a winner because she was ten points down 36 hours ago.

On to Michigan! On to South Carolina! Will there be a reason to vote in a presidential primary here in March?