Happy trails

Good people, good candidates sometimes lose. The narrative in the Democratic primary is not yet complete, but only the epilogue remains. Here is where Hillary must be careful.

She must make a decision about whether she presses on with negative attacks, or begins to gracefully draw distinctions with Obama. The latter provides a future opening for magnanimous withdrawal from the primary and support for the Democratic nominee. Conversely, the former begins to paint Clinton in unflattering colors, risking not only the 2008 Presidential race, but also creating a rift in the Democratic Party.

It must be difficult for the Clintons. They have been good Democrats. Not great, but solid. I think what they failed to recognize can be summed up in the Ned Lamont senatorial contest against Leiberman in Connecticut. Bill and Hillary had an opportunity to campaign for Lamont against Leiberman, and did not. Perhaps they were helpful behind the scenes, I can’t pretend to know. But Lamont was a movement, a grassroots movement similar to the Obama phenomena. I think the Clintons (and the Dem Party establishment) failed to recognize the unrest in the party, and the degree to which change is desired.

Maybe it would not have been different if Hillary had actively campaigned for Lamont. I’m almost certain that Lamont would have still lost…but the greater point would have been made for Clinton. She would have supported grassroots movements, stood for changing the status quo, and would have become part of the movement. Instead, in my eyes, she’s viewed as part of the problem. Same old, same old.

There is a groundswell out in the American landscape. Most establishment Dems think they can ride it out…they’re wrong. Get on board or get swept aside.