Blunders by Clinton

OPINION:

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Democrats’ extended primary campaign could help their efforts for November’s general election.

Neither candidate has had a stellar month of March. Barack Obama is now distancing himself from some of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s sermons but still embracing him as “like family.” Mr. Obama may have largely defeated his own admired “post-racial, multicultural” position by his long relationship with Mr. Wright, who presided over his wedding and in whose pews he has sat for 20 years. Nor does it pass the credibility test that Mr. Obama claims he never knew of Mr. Wright’s volatile statements, or that no one in the congregation would have told him, about God damning America, blaming the United States for Sept. 11, anti-Israel rantings, and racial supremacist attitude in sermons, blogs and church newsletters (granted not in personal meetings).

Hillary Clinton may have reduced her well-earned reputation for in-depth understanding of issues by her inaccurate reference to avoiding bullets raining down on her on her Bosnia trip 10 years ago. The description is uncharacteristic of her normal superb factual precision and knowledge that we have seen publicly and privately in and since her White House years.

In addition, she made a strategic error early in the campaign, ceding some of the party base claimed by Mr. Obama by not admitting her Iraq authorization vote was a “mistake.” Gen. Wesley Clark told us he believes Mrs. Clinton made “a general election decision” in not saying “mistake”; but she has to get there first. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton have virtually identical phased-withdrawal positions.

Despite the fact that Mrs. Clinton is only 130 delegates behind with 800 to be determined of the 4,000 total, and with less than 1 percent difference in popular vote, Mr. Obama’s supporters are trying to end the race. To his credit, Mr. Obama himself has publicly resisted the temptation, stating Saturday in Pennsylvania (where Mrs. Clinton leads by double digits) that “Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants.”

Voters and the superdelegates are entitled to learn more about both candidates’ electability. If Mr. Obama were to run the table with all or most of the remaining 10 primaries — including Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina — he would deserve to be declared the winner; so would Mrs. Clinton if she won most, since a candidate’s latest momentum is critical as a general-election indicator.

Moreover, Mrs. Clinton has an extraordinarily strong that case since she won the DNC-banned Michigan and Florida primaries (worth over 300 delegates) and is well ahead now in those critical states, it is outrageous to discount or simply split them. Behind the scenes, Mr. Obama has blocked the ability to get accurate votes and is pressing to split the states 50-50. Democrats cannot be seen as the new Katherine Harris of Florida, stopping the counting — the resentment will cost in the general election. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has stated that he will accept a plan for revotes or true counts.

In addition, what kind of contorted system do we have where one candidate (Clinton) wins the popular vote in critical Texas, yet another (Obama) wins more delegates because he got people who had time to show up for hours at the post-election caucuses? Superdelegates know real votes count in November, not caucus attendees.

Key primaries — including New Hampshire, Texas and Ohio — were decided in the last few days of each. There are two months between the convention and general election. Democrats will have a political eternity to show unity with their message against the Bush-McCain tax cuts for the rich, the Iraq war’s cost in lives, injuries, time and dollars, and the impact of those policies on the deficit and sinking economy while we have missed the primary terrorist targets, including Osama bin Laden.

The extended campaign is allowing Democrats to continue their all-time record turnout and get media for their message while Mr. McCain has to scramble with no meaningful venue. Polls show Mr. Obama with a 6-point lead over Mr. McCain, and Mrs. Clinton with 5 (which is virtually identical).

The Democratic National Convention in Denver could have actual media relevance and not be downgraded to pre-emption by “Law and Order.” It could pick a candidate.

FDR, perhaps the Democratic Party’s all-time greatest luminary, was selected on the fourth ballot and defeated an incumbent president during a downwardly spiraling economy — a familiar environment now. Woodrow Wilson was elected after being nominated on the 46th ballot. If an extended campaign with a brokered convention worked for FDR and others, why isn’t it OK for Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama?

Robert Weiner, who served in the Clinton administration and as a congressional aide, is president of Robert Weiner Associates. John Larmett, who served as a congressional aide, is senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates.