Posted by DEAN SKIP RUTHERFORD – I’ve known Hillary Clinton for more than 30 years. I have and will always have the highest regard for her. We worked on education issues; we served together on the Arkansas Children’s Hospital board; our daughters played on the same softball team; and I had the privilege of chairing the Clinton Foundation during the planning, construction and opening of the Clinton Presidential Library. She is an incredible person and would make an outstanding president. With the highest percentage of the 54 primaries, Arkansas supported her overwhelmingly. Depending on which states are included in the count, she may have actually won the overall popular vote.
However, at this juncture that is moot. Congressman Rahm Emanuel said it well: “It depends how the loser loses whether the winner wins in November,” and he’s right. As an example, one of the reasons Senator Mark Pryor had a meteoric rise in Arkansas politics (no Republican opposition for a second Senate term) was the class he showed and the respect he earned in accepting defeat after a tough loss to Attorney General Winston Bryant several years ago. Since that time, Pryor has been unbeatable.
Contrary to the opinion of some others whom I respect, Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination because he made wise strategic decisions in two areas (1) technology and (2) better understanding the party rules, the complicated delegate selection process and competing in both caucuses and primaries. Senator Clinton’s vote to support the war in Iraq (though I thought at the time she was right) first opened the door for Senator Obama. But he had the prevailing primary message — change — and based on his organizational and oratorical skills, he proved to be an effective messenger. As Senator Clinton told me in 1991 while we sitting at the ballpark watching our daughters play softball, what the Democratic Party needed to win was the right message and the right messenger. Whether Senator Obama’s change is stronger than Senator Clinton’s experience in the November election remains to be seen. Many Obama supporters say yes. Many Clinton supporters say no. Only time will tell.
I sympathize with those women who are disappointed, hurt and even angry. After all, many women (including my 110-year-old grandmother) have waited lifetimes for the opportunity to elect and experience a woman president. They thought 2008 was their time and their year. Quite frankly, I did too. Unfortunately, in politics no one has the market on times and years. Though sexism probably did play a part (as did and as will racism) the real factor is not what Senator Clinton didn’t do, or Bill Clinton’s role, or media bias; it’s what Senator Obama did. He won at the grassroots and in the trenches. His victory is historic – -particularly for those of us who grew up in the segregated South. Like John Kennedy in 1960, Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy in 1968 and Bill Clinton in 1992, he also energized a new generation. Additionally, when someone can raise $55 million in one month, $45 million of it online and without hosting a single fundraiser, you have to acknowledge the strength. And when it comes to communicating, Senator Obama’s the best we’ve seen since President Ronald Reagan and may in fact be better. He’s also showing maturity beyond his years.
Interestingly, many younger women are actively supporting Senator Obama. As others have noted before about this campaign, youth and change at times trumped gender. The real test, however, will be in November whether mothers, aunts, grandmothers and their friends can be influenced by others. I asked my grandmother if she would vote for Senator Obama and, though he’s not her first choice, she said yes.
Former Secretary of Defense William Cohen in a luncheon at the Clinton School before a recent speech here said he liked and respected all three of the frontrunners (Senators McCain, Clinton and Obama). Secretary Cohen served in President Clinton’s cabinet and was the best man at John McCain’s wedding. So he speaks with some authority. But he said — based on his travels around the globe — that the world’s choice in 2008 is Senator Obama. Why? Because a large percentage of the world’s population is not Caucasian. There’s certainly been very little reporting or emphasis on this particular point, but perhaps there will be in the months ahead. We’ll soon see Senator Obama traveling internationally. Pay attention to the crowds he draws and the response he receives because world reaction may well influence American reaction. Not too long ago, 75,000 people turning out for Senator Obama at a rally in Oregon certainly created a national buzz. His crowd of 32,000 (17,000 inside and 15,000 outside) Tuesday night in St. Paul wasn’t shabby either.
It is entirely too early to determine a November winner. We don’t know who the vice presidential candidates will be; we don’t know what will be happening with the war, the economy, gas prices, food prices, international relations, health care, social issues and other matters. We do know Senator McCain is by far the strongest candidate the Republicans could nominate in a year where Republicans face potentially big losses in the Congress; a time when a large number of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction and when President George W. Bush’s approval ratings are in the tank. But Senator McCain is a war hero and a maverick with experience. Even his critics acknowledge years of fierce independence. We also know the Republican National Committee is far ahead of the Democratic National Committee in raising money. Senator McCain should sweep the South with possible challenges in North Carolina and Virginia. If Senator Clinton is on the ticket, add Arkansas to the Southern states in play. Senator McCain has a good chance in Michigan where Democrats have been winning. But Senator Obama will strongly contest Iowa, Colorado, Ohio, Nevada and New Mexico where Republicans have won in the past. Current polls are projecting a very close Electoral College vote. Let’s see what they say after the conventions in late August and early September.
Given many factors including the strong way she finished the campaign, Senator Clinton must be given even more serious vice presidential consideration. There’s precedent for such a move. Look back to 1960 when a young Senator from Massachusetts defeated an older experienced Senator from Texas in the primary. Later, the two rivals teamed up making President John F. Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson winners. Though times were different then, that partnership didn’t develop until the convention.
President or not, vice president or not, Senator Clinton will remain a major force. She made it very clear in her remarks Tuesday night that she wasn’t going away. She solidified support from many of the millions who voted for her and who now anxiously await a signal on “where we go from here.” The speech reinforced her already powerful bargaining chip, and I assume a “where we go from here” strategy will be determined in the near term after some well earned rest.
If Senator Obama loses in November, there’s 2012 for her to consider. If he wins and she’s not vice president, there’s a career in the Senate, maybe Governor of New York, or possibly the Cabinet or the Supreme Court. Either way, one thing is certain: she will be a very formidable and important player in America’s future, and if she’s not on the ticket I hope she will spend some of her time at the Clinton School and at other educational institutions. Four decades ago at the University of Arkansas Law School she was a great teacher. Throughout this presidential campaign and though she didn’t win, she proved she still is one.