On The Value of a Long Primary
A lot of Democrats have been freaking out about having a long primary battle. The fear is that it prevents them from campaigning against John McCain and allows him to rift the holes in his coalition and lob attacks at them.
I don't think that is true. In fact, I think it might be a good thing if the primary battle goes all the way to the convention (or close) as long as the pledged delegate winner wins.
Advantages:
1. Less time for Republicans to smear the winner. This might not matter much with Clinton, who has been smeared for the past fifteen years. But for Obama, he wouldn't face unified attack until only two months were left in the election.
2. The Democratic primary sucks the air out of McCain's message. At the point McCain has to be accused of fucking a lobbyist or be caught in an outright lie to even get on television. Almost every show, save for Fox news (and, from what I've understood, even them) is 75 percent Democratic coverage. Why? It's news!
3. It increases Democratic interest. The base is motivated. Last month Obama raised a record $36 million in a month. This month, Clinton raised around $35 million and Obama may have raised between $50-60 million. That isn't big money donors: it's apparently mostly coming from small donors. Small donors tend to reflect passionate voters. Obama's crowds also indicate a lot of passion (and it is worth remembering not to underestimate how passionately many voters feel about the Clinton campaign).
4. Democrats may have to campaign and build general election campaign infrastructure in fifty states and assorted territories (and whatever D.C. is). The Democratic party hasn't been organized as a national party in a long time. One of the things Howard Dean is trying to do is build up dormant organizations in Red States. With some effort and luck, that infrastructure/ground game will result in a few purple states turning blue and a few red states turning purple. Even if it isn't that powerful, it could revitalize State and local parties which will produce more and better lower level candidates to feed into national office (When I lived in Houston, I was surprised that it never felt as conservative as I thought - in fact, it felt pretty blue. So I'm not surprised that the Texas campaign appears to be reviving the Texas democratic party by bringing in a bunch of new voters and allowing local politicians to know where to look for votes).
5. The Democrats get better! Obama looks stronger in debates. Clinton is improving her grass roots organization and learning to focus on small donors. Competition is forcing both of them to improve their games, so whomever emerges will be better prepared for the general election.
6. McCain, screaming from the sidelines while his own voters mock him, looks feeble and weak.
All and all, I don't mind a long primary.
I don't think that is true. In fact, I think it might be a good thing if the primary battle goes all the way to the convention (or close) as long as the pledged delegate winner wins.
Advantages:
1. Less time for Republicans to smear the winner. This might not matter much with Clinton, who has been smeared for the past fifteen years. But for Obama, he wouldn't face unified attack until only two months were left in the election.
2. The Democratic primary sucks the air out of McCain's message. At the point McCain has to be accused of fucking a lobbyist or be caught in an outright lie to even get on television. Almost every show, save for Fox news (and, from what I've understood, even them) is 75 percent Democratic coverage. Why? It's news!
3. It increases Democratic interest. The base is motivated. Last month Obama raised a record $36 million in a month. This month, Clinton raised around $35 million and Obama may have raised between $50-60 million. That isn't big money donors: it's apparently mostly coming from small donors. Small donors tend to reflect passionate voters. Obama's crowds also indicate a lot of passion (and it is worth remembering not to underestimate how passionately many voters feel about the Clinton campaign).
4. Democrats may have to campaign and build general election campaign infrastructure in fifty states and assorted territories (and whatever D.C. is). The Democratic party hasn't been organized as a national party in a long time. One of the things Howard Dean is trying to do is build up dormant organizations in Red States. With some effort and luck, that infrastructure/ground game will result in a few purple states turning blue and a few red states turning purple. Even if it isn't that powerful, it could revitalize State and local parties which will produce more and better lower level candidates to feed into national office (When I lived in Houston, I was surprised that it never felt as conservative as I thought - in fact, it felt pretty blue. So I'm not surprised that the Texas campaign appears to be reviving the Texas democratic party by bringing in a bunch of new voters and allowing local politicians to know where to look for votes).
5. The Democrats get better! Obama looks stronger in debates. Clinton is improving her grass roots organization and learning to focus on small donors. Competition is forcing both of them to improve their games, so whomever emerges will be better prepared for the general election.
6. McCain, screaming from the sidelines while his own voters mock him, looks feeble and weak.
All and all, I don't mind a long primary.
its fairly obvious that i am not republican. i didnt know which way i was going to swing (as far as obama or hilary) but after hearing obama speak-- i was sold. maybe i'm just so used to having to listen to a president speak who sounds like he just stepped off of the special bus. that aside-- i really believe that hilary cares about the country. so either way-- it'll be good.
i can't wait-- the closer to election, the juicier it gets.
oh well
Re: oh well