Login or register About | Submit | RSS Feeds
Cultural Shifts

Death of a Campaign

Matthew Lymburner
Last Modified: March 28, 2008
Issue: March 2008
1 Recommended this Post
Comments & References 3

At the risk of revealing my obsession with the presidential primary season in the U.S., I’d like to draw attention to the collapse of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. This race has certainly been a difficult one to pin down - for all observers I think. But as of last night I am able to make a projection (cue the cheesy CNN sound clip): Barack Obama will win the democratic primary, I repeat, Barack Obama will win the democratic nomination.I didn’t come to this conclusion by looking at the delegate numbers, or speculative assertions about super delegates, and certainly not by examining the poll numbers. Rather, it was by half-jokingly applying Elizabeth Kubler-Ross’s “Five Stages of Grief” to the Clinton campaign. Let me enumerate each stage with a brief example.

1. Denial: Up until four or five months ago, Barack Obama was not on the pundit radar. When I first heard him speak some year and a half ago, I knew he would go places in U.S. politics, but I did not expect it to be so soon, or even so far. To use that disparaging term, he was not even the ‘dark horse’ in the democratic party. But when that quickly changed and the delegate numbers started coming in, Clinton acted, with her characteristic sense of entitlement, as if Obama was merely a fly that would buzz itself out in a short time. As recently as Super Tuesday, she believed, or at least portrayed the belief that Obama was not a force to be reckoned with.

2. Anger: Quickly after her first defeat, the Clinton machine became angry - who is this usurper of my rightful ascent to power? The slurs began to fly, most recently with the pre-Texas round of negativity. One might even frame her shedding of a tear prior to New Hampshire as a sign of internal anger that this just wasn’t fair. She had big plans, good policies, a vision that deserves to be implemented. How could this happen?

3. Bargaining: When Obama passed her in total expected delegate count, advisors began deserting her campaign, and time was running out, she began to bargain. Just as one bargains with time to spare them from death, with considerable hubris, Hillary and Bill began proposing fantastical possibilities of a joint-ticket - with Obama on the second line. Obama, and the party leadership, quickly sped her along the road to the next stage when they flatly rejected such a proposal.

4. Depression: Most recently, Hillary has begun apologizing for all of the mistakes she made along the way. One could interpret this as an acceptance of loss, though this has not come formally or publicly yet. Rather, I see it as a kind of self-pitying that things could have been better and different, but they’re not. It is impossible to predict these kind of things, but I expect Hillary to campaign with significantly less vigour than before.

5. Acceptance: I believe this is still yet to come, perhaps after the Pennsylvania primary, but of course, if may come sooner - or later.

This is hardly a faithful interpretation of the model, and I do it thoroughly from a lay perspective. Alternative analyses are certainly possible, and welcome. However, putting aside this lack of scientific rigour for a moment, this outline demonstrates one thing: that Hillary responded to her slow defeat the way someone does to something that they actually ‘have’ - a partner, a job, their own mortality. In true dynastic form, Clinton ‘grieves’ over something that she shouldn’t presume to have had, but feels is her divine right. I’m not one to buy into the popular, sweeping assertions about politics in any country, in this case, the ‘Bush-Clinton dynasty’ argument. Still, if in the mind of Hillary, she viewed herself as the rightful ‘heir’ to the presidency, American politics has been saved from a dangerous turn towards further elitism.


Matthew Lymburner is an MA student at the Institute of Political Economy, Carleton University. He is interested in Brazilian history and political economy, and progressive politics worldwide.
Email this author | Profile and posts by Matthew Lymburner

_

Responses & References

What's Related


Tags: , , , ,

3 Comments »

  1. View Profile

    I’m amused by the idea of Hillary Clinton going through the stages of mourning, and it does pretty well track what’s been happening. My reaction to Obama has been a little different from yours. I wasn’t sure there was much more to him than a PR machine, but his speech on race won me over. It might just lose him the election, but it had a ring of truth that I haven’t heard in politics in a long time. You could tell that speech wasn’t written by some poll-reading flack.

  2. Matthew Lymburner 26 March 2008 1:31 am View Profile

    I feel so left out - Obama’s recent speech is one of the only major ones that I have missed so far, and I still haven’t got around to watching it, but I did hear that he wrote most of it himself. You may be very right that the policy prescriptions and rhetoric he has advanced thus far will amount to nothing more than hot air if he attains the presidency. Probably that is the safest assumption - I’ve argued elsewhere that Barack’s campaign bears some striking similarities to Jimmy Carter’s, and we know how that turned out. But I also believe that ‘words’ can be more powerful than ‘actions’, if I may use that false dichotomy for a moment. If nothing more, “President” Obama may inspire Americans to reawaken their political appetite and lead them to engage their local governments, and their communities more broadly. Obama’s frank position on the racial realities of America over the course of this campaign (when he has been given room to express it free from the antagonistic framing of American media networks) is one such example of the the power his discursive contributions have made the American public dialogue already. Given the other viable alternatives, I think Obama presents the best opportunity that Americans (and indeed the world) currently have.

  3. View Profile

    You can see Obama’s speech on youtube, here.

    I must say that it was a fine speech. Obama’s never had a problem with that. I like the way he (or his staff) can analyse a complex situation and come up with effective ways to talk about it in a public forum. The problem of course is that he’s asking questions that have already been asked for a long time past. Not the same thing as offering solutions. Given, identifying the problem is a good and necessary step forward, but that’s still a far cry from doing anything substantial. That’s how elections go, though - so I’m hoping that he gets elected to the Whitehouse so that we can see how far he can take his progressive politics (so much for Ralph Nader!)

Leave a Comment or Question


Already have an account? Click here to login.