Winning the Battle to Lose the War? The Democratic Nomination Process.

Having read with some interest the ongoing debate about whether the continuing heated contest for Presidential candidacy between Senator’s Clinton and Obama is helping or hurting the Democratic Party, my thought is that a major point is being missed. The only real damage or risk to the Democratic Party and to the eventual candidate is if the contest participants fail to remind and discipline their respective followers that uniting behind one candidate in the general election is the primary goal.

Strong emotional support for a candidate can be a useful tool in political campaigns to build a strong volunteer support base and to encourage word of mouth recruitment. Problems arise when emotion overtakes reason and emotional support turns to zealotry. We have all seem evidence of such lapses and excesses in the campaign recently. When objectives of candidate supporters and candidate handlers become destruction of the opponent rather than extolling the virtues of their own candidate, everyone loses [except perhaps the opposing GOP Party candidate]. There is a line between vetting and testing a candidate for an upcoming national election contest, on one hand, and debilitating a candidate through massive exhaustion of energy and resources in a nomination war of attrition.

One potential benefit, it is argued, of a continued nomination battle is that it keeps the candidates in the spotlight and increases general participation in the electoral process. The veracity of that argument is yet to be proven, but there is logic to support it. When people feel strongly about electoral politics they may be more motivated to go to the polls to express their views. The flip side of that issue may be that voters who are overly bound emotionally to a potential nominee may decide to sit out the national election if their candidate is not the eventual nominee. That is the potential disaster that the Democratic Party must go to great lengths to prevent. Unfortunately, the candidates do not seem to recognize this potential disaster. They should be preaching to the voters in the states that have already held primaries and caucuses to prepare to rally behind the nominee, no matter whether that candidate is Clinton or Obama. This would not detract from the parallel message of the candidates fighting for each additional delegate and vote in primaries yet to be held. Yet neither candidate seems to display the selflessness of leadership required to assure the ultimate objective, that of retaking the White House in the November election.

Recent polls indicate that a striking number of Clinton supporters say that they would not back the Democratic Presidential candidate unless it is Hillary Clinton. A substantially larger number of Obama supporters say that they will support the Democratic nominee, even if Obama is not the eventual candidate. Critics have chastised Clinton for her self-serving strategies that seem more focused upon personal power than policy advances. This attitudinal bent may be playing itself out or may be translated to her supporters. While Obama supporters do not seem to show the same level of self-centered ruthlessness, the candidate’s failure to address the issue publicly is a definite shortcoming in his campaign to demonstrate the kind of moral courage the nation truly needs so badly.