Good news for Clintonites, bad news for Haters–it looks like Hillary is sticking around at least a little while longer.
Simply put, there’s almost no chance that the New York senator will concede the race to Barack Obama tonight. That’s because the only thing that could plausibly inspire a withdrawal–Obama winning both Ohio and Texas–is by far this evening’s most unlikely outcome.
Over the past few days, Clinton has benefited from the best news cycle she’s had in months. Partly it’s been good luck–Obama donor Tony Rezko went on trial for corruption yesterday, and a single “Saturday Night Live” sketch transformed the sour Clintonite complaint that the MSM favors Obama into pop-culture conventional wisdom overnight. But her staff also had a hand in the turnaround, luring Obama with the ostentatious “3:00 A.M.” ad into a debate over his national security experience and goading reporters into covering the Goolsbee flap, despite their initial reluctance. “Substitute my name for Senator Obama’s name and see what you would do with that story,” she said, working the refs. No chicken noises yet, but Biff Tannen would be proud.
The result? A gust of wind at her back. According to pollster John Zogby, “a combination of questions raised about Obama’s capacity to lead the military, his stance on NAFTA, and [concerns] about ethics have shaved a few points off his support” in Ohio, raising the number of undecideds from five to eight percent over the weekend. Meanwhile, Clinton has “clearly increased support among white men and Hispanic men [in the Lone Star State], mostly based on her late [focus] on her fitness for military command”; she now leads by four percent among voters who have decided in the past few days. All of which means that Clinton woke up this morning beating Obama in the final Texas polls by as much as five or six points–after trailing last week by a similar margin –and an enjoying an increased polling edge in Ohio (from about five points last week to about 10 now). The polls could always be wrong. (New Hampshire, anyone?) But right now, they’re all we have to go on–and the surveys say that an Obama sweep is tonight’s riskiest bet.
So what happens if the stats hold and Clinton takes Texas and Ohio (even by the slimmest of margins)? Six more weeks of winter. Of course, no matter what happens today–barring 30-point Clinton blowouts–Obama will still lead by more than 100 pledged delegates at the end of the evening. And it’s not clear where Clinton makes those delegates up, especially considering that the next two states on the schedule (Wyoming on Saturday and Mississippi next Tuesday) heavily favor her foe. But she will soldier on regardless–and the press, unable to resist the breathless “Comeback Gal” headlines, will provide the necessary afterglow. In this scenario, expect to hear a lot from Clinton surrogates about the “big states” she’s won–California, New York, New Jersey, Texas, Ohio, etc.–and the next populous property to vote: Pennsylvania on April 22, where Clinton currently leads by about five points. They’ll say that voters had “buyer’s remorse” about Obama and will continue hammering him on national security, NAFTA and Rezko. At that point, the ball will be in Obama’s court. A win in the Keystone State would make Clinton’s delegate math impossible and send superdelegates scurrying his way–ending the nomination fight once and for all But another loss to Clinton and this thing goes to the convention, with Clintonistas kicking and screaming to seat Florida and Michigan delegates and twisting every superdelegate arm they can get their mitts on.
The final scenario–Obama wins Texas, Clinton wins Ohio–won’t change Clinton’s calculus, at least not at first. (Check out her recent remarks about “just getting warmed up.”) But it will change everything else. Despite what Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo says–“there’s simply no denying that such an aura of victory has grown up around Obama that losing one or both of these big states… will be perceived as a very real turnaround”–I think that the ambiguity of a split decision will make those “comeback” narratives hard to justify. (Besides, everyone has long expected Clinton to win Ohio.) While Clinton will inevitably keep fighting–this month, she raised $35 million while losing 11 straight contests–it’s hard to see how she claws her way to victory. (Even though Mark Penn and Co. are already spinning a split decision as a rejection of Obama. Right.) Superdelegates will continue to break for the Illinois senator at a steady pace. Citing Bill Clinton’s assessment– “If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee. If you don’t deliver for her, I don’t think she can be”–party leaders like Bill Richardson will issue dire warnings about damaging Obama for the general and pressure her to withdraw. (“Whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee,” Richardson said this week.) Clinton may fight back by reminding the media that two-thirds of Democrats think she should continue campaigning even if she loses Texas. But arguing that the party should bide its time because she’s likely to win Pennsylvania in late April requires a convincing comeback narrative. Without that, I suspect that Democrats will be reluctant to sponsor another extended, divisive six-week battle–especially because it’s a battle that, in the end, has little chance of helping Clinton close the all-important delegate gap.
Check back later for my take on “what’s next” for Obama.
