George,

Barack Obama is being “swift boated” by the Clintons. Say what? Let’s first define “swift boating.” It is a propaganda campaign that puts doubts into people’s minds about what actually happened to someone or is happening. In John Kerry’s case, it questioned his abilities as a boat commander and cast doubt about whether his medals were actually earned.

This was such nonsense that Kerry did not think it would be believed by anyone.

Before our very eyes this primary campaign season, the Clintons (and their friends among the media commentators) have us taking seriously the following nonsense:

1) Counting total votes across all primary states is a legitimate method of scoring. This is like saying that the baseball team that has scored the most runs over a season should go to the World Series.

Baseball is scored game by game; primaries are scored state by state.

The ONLY way to score points in the primary/caucus process is to win delegates. And then there is the other piece of this nonsense: Hillary does not count states that held caucuses. (But almost hourly we hear someone bring up this “total vote” argument.)

2) Hillary claims that Michigan and Florida held legitimate primaries and their votes should be fully counted as cast. It would be undemocratic, Hillary says, not to do so (even though these elections were undemocratic, noncompetitive “contests” in which the voters had no way to learn about the candidates – especially the new kid on the block). Also, Clinton argues that many Democratic voters in Michigan and Florida will not vote Democratic in the fall if they are “slighted” by the DNC enforcing its rules. (This assumes that the overwhelming concern of many of these voters will be that they were “slighted” by the national Democratic party and that THAT concern will far outweigh their concerns about such things as the economy, Iraq and health care.)

3) White, working class Democrats and a great many women will not vote for Obama in the fall. Nonsense. This bogus analysis is based on primary results in which one Democrat is competing with another Democrat. Yes, many among the working class and many women preferred Clinton to Obama in these contests, but that does not mean that they will not vote for the Democrat in the fall. Primary contests between candidates of the same party simply cannot be compared with general election contests between a Democrat and a Republican.

I am aware of the polls that show a considerable number of Clinton supporters saying that they will not vote for Obama in the fall (and vice versa). This is bogus. In the heat of a current campaign, some supporters (who have just left the voting booth) are going to be so invested in their candidate that they cannot see any other candidate as worthy. However, come November, this intense feeling will have worn off and Democrats will vote for the Democratic candidate.

4) Hillary claims that there is a crystal ball that predicts that Obama will not be as strong an opponent against John McCain as she would be.

Again, nonsense. No reputable student of voting behavior has ever been able to find a way to measure voters’ attitudes this far in advance of a (Nov.) election. Again, the results of contests between two Democrats in primaries tells almost nothing about a contest between a Democrat and a Republican in the fall. The general election campaign does not get fully underway until the conventions take place. The number of voters who become fully involved in fall campaigns have always been at least double the number of voters who were involved in the primaries.

Hillary Clinton has been able to convince so many people to seriously consider the 4 nonsense points listed above that she has been able to avoid defeat. Serious journalists bring these 4 points up all the time.

After the Oregon and Kentucky primaries, Barack Obama has won a majority of legitimate pledged delegates. In any other election year since the extensive use of primaries/caucuses began in 1972, Obama would now be declared the nominee by all political observers (the media, party activists, etc.). In the past, since the votes of pledged delegates were known in advance, the conventions were really like a meeting of the Electoral College – the result of the convention was a foregone conclusion. And it was always the custom that superdelegates would vote for the candidate with the most pledged delegates.

But this year the nonsense (“swift boating”) points that the Clintons have trumpeted have effectively suspended the customary primary process that has been in effect since 1972. They have prevented Obama from being declared the nominee. That is powerful stuff. Now all the Clintons have to do is 1) persuade a majority of the DNC Rules Committee (which meets on May 31st to decide the fate of the Michigan and Florida delegations) to seat all those delegates in proportion to how the votes were cast, and 2) to persuade most of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates that Hillary should be the nominee. The Clintons have a lot of loyal friends on the Rules Committee and among the remaining superdelegates. We have seen that the 4 “swift boating” points are believed by many. We cannot expect these key party leaders to be an exception.

Hillary Clinton is not a fat lady and she doesn’t sing. It ain’t over till it’s over. Swift boats are dangerous weapons.

David RePass (Electronic mail, May 22, 2008)