Home
In this issue
Nov. 6, 2009
Rabbi Berel Wein: Choosing to hear
JWisdom.com Zero to 1/60th: How to Empower An Hour with Gavriel Aryeh Sande (7 minutes)
Caroline B. Glick The mullahs' big week
Suzanne Fields A Fallen Wall for Fallen Man
Nov. 5, 2009
The Kosher Gourmet: Three scrumptious -- but simple -- butternut squash dishes
JWisdom.com Hidden Hints: Unlocking Faith & Prayer with Rabbi Jay Yaacov Schwartz (10 minutes)
Nov. 4, 2009
Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger: Should prayers be covered?
JWisdom.com When God played peacemaker With Rabbi Sroy Levitansky (5 minutes)
Nov. 3, 2009
Martin Peretz: Beware, Barack. Beware, Rahm. Beware, Axelrod
JWisdom.com Are you are closet idolater? With Sara Yoheved Rigler (10 minutes)
Nov. 2, 2009
Paul Greenberg: The Holocaust is now on Facebook
JWisdom.com Abraham's Strange Change With Rabbi Yitzchok Fingerer (5 minutes)
Oct. 30, 2009
Rabbi David Aaron: Secret to Immortality
Caroline B. Glick Silencing dissent in America
Oct. 29, 2009
Lini S. Kadaba: Do tactics avert flu or reduce humanity?
JWisdom.com We Must Revamp our Religious Vocabulary With Gavriel Aryeh Sanders ( 10 minutes)
Oct. 28, 2009
Rabbi Yonason Goldson: Atheists in Bubbleland
JWisdom.com Why what we wear impacts who we are With Rabbis Mordechai Becher, Menachem Golberger and Aliza Bulow ( 10 minutes)
Oct. 27, 2009
Paul Greenberg: The United Nations Is Outraged Again, Or: Department of Mideast Static
JWisdom.com The Science of Love With Rabbi Jonathan Rietti ( 7 minutes)
Oct. 26, 2009
The Jewish Ethicist by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir: Damaging disclosures with a twist
JWisdom.com Wisdom and Wonks With Rabbi Eytan Feiner ( 7 minutes)
Oct. 23, 2009
Rabbi David Aaron: Are you ready for the ultimate pleasure?
JWisdom.com Watermark and oneness with Rabbi Sroy Levitansky ( 4 minutes)
Caroline B. Glick Stop using limited powers in a way that expands our enemies' advantages over us
Oct. 22, 2009
Steven Emerson: Terror Cases Share Desire to Kill Americans
JWisdom.com No More More Family Fights --- Really? By Sarah Chana Radcliffe ( 5 minutes)
Oct. 21, 2009
Tonya Alanez: Holocaust denier sues survivor, calling Auschwitz memoir 'vicious lies'
JWisdom.com Meditating Jewishly: A Panacea for Success by Sarah Yoheved Rigler ( 7 minutes)
Oct. 20, 2009
Dennis Prager: Obama and Dalai Lama: Why Israel Worries about U.S. President
JWisdom.com Abraham was not religious By Rabbi Yitzchok Fingerer ( 6 minutes)
Oct. 19, 2009
JWisdom.comWhy Good People Do Bad Things By Rabbi Eytan Feiner ( 7 minutes)
Oct. 16, 2009
Rabbi Yonason Goldson: The Perfect Number
JWisdom.com Hearing Voices By Rabbi Sroy Levitansky ( 5 minutes)
Caroline B. Glick How Turkey was lost
Oct. 15, 2009
Jeff Jacoby: Peace vs. the 'peace process'
JWisdom.com: Former MTV producer and stand-up comedian Rabbi Lawrence Hajioff: Taming a Control Freak (A VERY fast 15 minutes)
Oct. 29, 2003
Mortimer B. Zuckerman: Graffiti On History's Walls (MUST-READ!)

Jewish World Review March 19, 2008 / 12 Adar II 5768

Obama's damage control speech didn't pander; does it explain?

By Roger Simon


Printer Friendly Version

Email this article

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Is it possible to win the Democratic nomination in such a way as to make winning not worth it?


The Barack Obama campaign thinks so. It thinks Hillary Clinton's campaign is willing to take any road to the White House, including the low road.


"They would do anything to win, and that means anything," David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, told me Monday. "There is a frenetic energy around them to commandeer this election in any way they can."


Axelrod went on: "She is the ultimate Washington inside player. She is always asking, 'How do we wire the vote? How do we wire the system to get the results we want?'"


From his point of view, the Clinton campaign keeps trying to change the rules.


"When they started off, it was all about delegates," Axelrod said. "Now that we have more delegates, it's all about the popular vote. And if that does not work out, they will probably challenge us to a game of cribbage to choose the nominee."


Another Obama senior aide told me he believed Clinton was willing to "destroy the party" just as long as she ends up with the nomination.


I asked Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson for a response.


"I think these apocalyptic quotes are unhelpful," Wolfson said. "I don't envision that either side would destroy the party. There is a democratic process here to play out. This process is not over. There are still 10 [contests] left to vote. What is the fear here? Let's let democracy run its course."


From the perspective of the Clinton campaign, it has little choice but to go all-out. As a top Clinton aide admitted to me: "Under our projections, if you sat both the Michigan and Florida delegations as they now exist and based on our projections for the remaining contests, Sen. Clinton would still trail narrowly on pledged delegates going into the convention."


Which means that Clinton almost certainly cannot get to the Denver convention with a lead in pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. She also cannot win a majority of states, even if she wins every remaining contest.


It is still possible for her to pull ahead of Obama in the popular vote if she does very well in the remaining contests.


But who says the popular vote counts in choosing a nominee? Those are not the party rules, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pointed out on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday.


"It's a delegate race," Pelosi said. "The way the system works is that the delegates choose the nominee."


The Obama campaign knows the Clinton campaign has no intention of accepting that.


And the Clinton campaign has already sold — with mild success — the notion that the leader in the popular vote has some claim to the nomination.


If Clinton manages to get a popular vote lead, she will use that to persuade party insiders — the 794 so-called superdelegates — to give her the nomination. A front-page story in The New York Times on Sunday quoted two undecided superdelegates as saying the popular vote will be something they consider in deciding for whom to vote.


And Wolfson made clear to me that what the Obama campaign considers "commandeering," the Clinton campaign sees as a legitimate path to victory.


"I think the automatic [i.e., super] delegates are going to make their assessment on a number of different criteria," Wolfson said. "The overall delegate count, the popular vote, momentum, states won by each candidate [not just the number, but the size], the coalitions of each candidate, who matches up best with John McCain, and who would be the best president."


The Obama campaign says it is willing to compete on every front, but it views the Clinton strategy as one of desperation.


"They are throwing long," Axelrod told me. "They are running up whatever roadblocks they can. She has her sight set on this nomination as a personal goal, and she has been tenacious — as we would expect — in pursuit of that goal."


But, Axelrod believes, there can be a downside to such tenacity.


"This is an election in which, fundamentally, people want change and being the consummate Washington inside player doesn't convince people that this is change we need," he said. "I don't think our voters' attitude is that we should win at all costs and through all means. I don't think that is what our folks believe."


Which is a very high-road way of looking at things. But does the high road always lead to the White House?

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.


Comment on Roger Simon's column by clicking here.


Roger Simon Archives


© 2008, Creators Syndicate