With Senator Barack Obama poised this week to clinch the Democratic party’s nomination for president, there are growing fears in some quarters that the Democratic party may not be choosing its strongest candidate to beat Republican John McCain.
Senator Hillary Clinton has been making that argument for weeks. Now some recent polls and analyses, looking particularly at vital battleground states and support among white voters, have bolstered her case — even as Obama looks certain to become the nominee.
Obama supporters reject this argument and point to his record of boosting Democratic voter turnout, especially among the young. But skeptics in the party, already nervous about nominating Obama after the furor over outspoken pastor Jeremiah Wright, are growing increasingly concerned.
“There is an element of buyer’s remorse in some areas. The question is whether it gets really strong now or in September — or even after the election is over, if he loses,” said Steve Mitchell, head of political consultancy Mitchell Research.
Another boost to Clinton’s case came late last week after a pro-Obama preacher gave a race-tinged rant against her at Obama’s church in Chicago. In a recent sermon Michael Pfleger — a long-term Obama backer who is white — mocked Clinton as an entitled white person angry because a black man has beaten her. His angry, red-faced speech, in which he mimicked Clinton weeping, was played repeatedly across US cable channels and the Internet.
The news sent shock waves through Democratic circles; many had hoped Obama had put “pastor problems” behind him.
“It is more of the same problem as Wright. It reinforces the image among some voters that Obama does not share their values,” Mitchell said.
The uproar also lent a disturbingly antagonistic tone to scenes in Washington where Clinton and Obama supporters gathered on Saturday outside a party rules meeting called to resolve the problem of the disputed Michigan and Florida primaries, which Clinton claims as victories. Clinton supporters chanted “count our votes” and waved placards and banners. Clinton wants those states’ delegations seated at the Denver convention, despite their breaking of party rules in holding early contests.
Obama is now to some extent limping to the finishing line. Clinton’s refusal to bow out even though her odds of victory have become almost impossible, has seen her win several of the most recent contests. In fact, since March 4, Clinton has won around half a million more votes than Obama. That run of victories continued in Puerto Rico, and could even extend to the final primaries — South Dakota and Montana — which vote today. Obama had been expected to win there, but Clinton has been campaigning furiously and it could be close.
Clinton has been making the case for several months, as her support has grown stronger among white working class voters, that those voters will not support Obama in a general election. By contrast, experts believe Obama’s core — educated Democrats and blacks — will remain loyal to the party no matter who the nominee is. There is strong data to back that up, especially from recent votes in West Virginia and Kentucky where large proportions of Clinton voters said they would not back Obama in November.
There is also a growing fear that many of the women backing Clinton are turning against Obama. Clinton and her supporters have controversially accused their rival, and the media, of being misogynistic in the last few weeks of the race. A recent Pew Poll showed Obama’s support among white women collapsing from 56 percent to 43 percent.
But the electoral fact remains the same. The dramatic Obama vs Clinton contest is now down to a few hundred uncommitted party “superdelegates,” who are under huge pressure to make their decisions in the next few days. Senior party figures, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have been working privately to convince them to make that decision as soon as possible, ideally this week. With Obama’s delegate lead unassailable, the vast majority are almost certain to come over to his side.
Republican analysts, meanwhile, are surprised about how healthy their party’s prospects look in a year when almost all indicators suggested they should lose. McCain remains competitive against Obama. He even leads in some key states. Indeed, some research predicts he could romp home against Obama.
It is that prospect, Clinton supporters say, that leads them to keep fighting. They point to Obama’s performance in North Carolina as a bellwether: It was his strong win there earlier this month that dealt an almost fatal blow to Clinton’s chances. Yet, two weeks after that win, polls showed Clinton easily outperformed Obama there when measured against McCain.
“Clinton has a very strong argument that she is a stronger candidate against McCain. It is just that it has fallen on deaf ears,” Mitchell said.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS