Saturday, February 9, 2008

Analyzing Super Tuesday

Now that all the spin and counterspin has ended, how is the average citizen supposed to interpret Super Tuesday?

Is it true that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton blunted the momentum of Barack Obama in the final days before the election? Or did Barack Obama battle the Clinton juggernaut to a tie, rallying from up to 30 points behind in some states?

I believe the former, and here's why. Politics, unlike history, is all about the present, the here and now. What happened in the past is irrelevant. The rapidly changing kaleidescope of national politics generates its own demands, and, candidates who are unable to satisfy those demands fall by the wayside. It's all about today's headlines and tomorrow's.

Any pundit will tell you how, in politics, a day is like a year, and, thus, yesterday's headlines are a year old. Barack Obama has amassed one of the most amazing fundraising operations in the history of the nation, but, in spite of his monetary advantages, he is unable to put Hillary Clinton away; he just seems incapable of delivering that knockout blow.

We saw it in New Hampshire; we saw it again on Super Tuesday. Despite his momentum from Iowa, and later from South Carolina, a few days before the election, he starts hemorrhaging support.

The reason: Hillary Rodham Clinton is a uniquely compelling figure, and her time has come. Maybe, it's destiny, but she keeps hanging on, staying close, remaining in the game. And the longer this occurs, just like the other Super victory of the New York Giants over the New England Patriots, the more likely she will breakthrough, stage a comeback and win in the end.