Democratic voters appear to be narrowing the conversation about their presidential nominee to a choice between front-runner Hillary Clinton and the super insurgent Barack Obama. The contest has grown so unpredictable that people who should know better are now talking about the possibility of a brokered convention in Denver next summer. The intensity of the race between these two celebrity senators threatens to overwhelm the entire campaign season. Democratic voters appear to be narrowing the conversation about their presidential nominee to a choice between front-runner Hillary Clinton and the super insurgent Barack Obama. The contest has grown so unpredictable that people who should know better are now talking about the possibility of a brokered convention in Denver next summer. The intensity of the race between these two celebrity senators threatens to overwhelm the entire campaign season.
But for all the historical significance attached to having a woman and an African American in contention for a major party nomination, the Clinton-Obama showdown is a familiar confrontation between an establishment powerhouse and an upstart young Turk, solidity versus excitement. In the frame of the current campaign, it is experience against change. Most Democrats will admit that, in the end, they can live with either one.
But as we draw closer to actual votes being cast, the value of punditry and speculation begin to fade and the Democrat who seems most comfortable in his own skin and most secure at his core is John Edwards, who is neither the Establishment candidate nor the Excitement candidate. Still, as Clinton and Obama increasingly find themselves playing call and response, saying things to upset and derail each other, Edwards is emerging as the feisty voice in the back field talking most directly to the voters.
As a firm believer in the man/woman-of-the-moment doctrine, I hardly expected to be contemplating John Edwards' prospects at this late stage in the game. The early rounds of the campaign seemed to firmly establish that his moment had passed and that what he offered the American people was not what they were interested in.
And frankly, not much has changed. While it is still hard to extrapolate all the way to an Edwards nominating speech next summer, it is not hard to see how voters might choose to reject both Clinton and Obama for all the reasons they have articulated against each other. And that leaves Edwards as the compromise candidate.
Admittedly, this is not the strongest hand to play, but Edwards does have a few things in his favor. The top three are:
- Sitting senators don't get to be president.
- The best preparation for running for president is to have run for president.
- More than anyone else, Edwards seems to be running on something he believes in.
After spending the past month attacking Hillary Clinton's credibility, Edwards has backed off and turned his fire on the economic inequality affecting the lives and futures of middle- and working-class Americans. Noting Edwards' shift in tone, Politico's David Paul Kuhn wrote this week:
Edwards' role as the positive populist in the Democratic field has returned at a moment when the political stakes could not be higher. In the final month before the Iowa caucuses, the Edwards campaign has decided to refrain from the aggressive strategy that defined its message for months.
The question now before Democrats in Iowa, New Hampshire, and beyond, is whether to support Mrs. Establishment, support Mr. Excitement, or split the difference with a John Edwards. It's a complicated political calculation, but it's all that Edwards can audaciously hope for.
Clearly, Obama has found his voice, whatever that means, and we now find ourselves in this very odd space where we are talking, seriously talking, about whether he, and what he represents, can be president of the United States. He has attracted history's attention.
Which is the real bummer for the Clinton campaign, which had the history card queued up and ready for the big play. Now they are in a fight for their lives, and for a campaign that has made almost no mistakes, that is hard to live with. But if anyone understands the value of staying in the game no matter what, until it turns in your favor, it would be the Clintons of Arkansas/New York/Chicago. It would be hard for the Clinton campaign, but the best strategy right now for the junior senator from New York is to just hang on and let the rollercoaster roll.
Still, if you're going to bet against Clinton at this point, you should use someone else's money. And assume that the person with the best chance of knocking her off is Obama.
But with Clinton and Obama focused on sparring with each other, Edwards has been hard at work to develop a rapport with voters -- who, in the end, are the only ones that count.
