-
Did Obama miss the best pitch he's going to see in this debate? The second question, from a man named Oliver Clark, asked the candidates: "Well, senators, through this economic crisis, most of the people that I know have had a difficult time. And through this bailout package, I was wondering what it is that's going to actually help those people out."
McCain responded first, giving an airy answer about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—institutions, he suggested, the questioner "may never even have heard of ... before this crisis"—and taking a snipe at Obama for his contributions from those institutions. At this point, the moment felt eerily analogous to the most famous question from the 1992 town hall debate below, in which a young woman asked the three candidates how the national debt had personally affected them. (She probably meant the recession.) George H.W. Bush's response (about 20 seconds into the video) was muddled and aloof, and Bill Clinton pounced on the opportunity to give a personal, compassionate-sounding response (2:30 in the video). The exchange was instant presidential-debate lore.
As Jack Shafer wrote in Slate today, Clinton's '92 playbook has more than a few valuable pages in it, and Obama's answer hardly lived up. After a mini economics lesson about frozen credit markets and their effect on business, he flipped the question into an attack on McCain's support for deregulation. The man-of-the-people card may not be Obama's strong point, but one can't help feel that he missed an essential opportunity to connect with voters.
-
Stand outside any campaign event and you'll see profiteers hocking their wares. Bumper stickers, playing cards, pins, posters, T-shirts, even pet-wear—if it's got Obama's face on it, chances are someone will pay for it. But will this merchandise be worth anything after Election Day?
If the recent past is any indication, no. Representatives from Sotheby's and Christie's I spoke with couldn't recall auctioning off contemporary campaign memorabilia recently. In 1991, Sotheby's did offer up a collection of 20,000 election mementos that had been estimated to sell for $2.5 million to $3.5 million. Nobody made a single bid.
But this election could be different. Daryle Lambert of Illinois, an antiques and collectibles dealer for the past 45 years and author of the book 31 Steps to your Millions in Antiques & Collectibles, believes items collected during this campaign season will yield sky-high returns because of the historic significance of the candidates. "This election by far has more appeal to the collector than any in my lifetime," said the 67-year-old collector, who offers advice on collecting items on his blog. Lambert said that if he were attending the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, he would take home memorabilia by the truckload. But if space is limited, the savvy collector should look for the following items.
1. Autographs: Anything signed by the candidates will start to appreciate immediately, Lambert says. He just bought a signed photo of Ronald Reagan for $300 and estimates its worth to be closer to $800; and his company is currently selling a land grant signed by Patrick Henry in the 18th century for an asking price of $4,850. So if you find a cancelled check signed by Obama or McCain's high-school yearbook, hold on to it.
2. Artwork: A standard-issue campaign button doesn't command much in the current marketplace. (Bids on eBay start at 99 cents.) But a hand-crafted pin could be valuable. Massachusetts-based artist Brian Campbell paints campaign pins with pop-culture allusions to the candidates and their spouses, such as a Beatles-themed Michelle Obama pin, an Indiana Jones-themed McCain one titled "Arizona John," and the Barack Obama one shown above. Some of these sell on eBay with starting bids around $60. A Hillary Clinton pin based on Eugène Delacroix's 19th-century painting Liberty Leading the People sold at auction for $1,149 through political memorabilia dealer Anderson Auction.
3. Personal items: If you see McCain drop a handkerchief or Obama lose a flag lapel pin, snag it like it's a home-run ball at the World Series. "The closer it is to the source, the quicker the value will appreciate," said Lambert.
4. Scandal souvenirs: "The things that become collectible are the things that destroy campaigns," Lambert said, citing as examples anything connected to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, who threw a wrench in John Kerry's 2004 campaign; or former candidate John Edwards, in light of the recent revelation of his affair with Rielle Hunter. So if something goes horribly wrong in Denver or St. Paul, Minn., try to get some physical remembrance of the wreckage.
Keep in mind, though, that the majority of campaign memorabilia on eBay starts at $20 or less. So collecting election merchandise for the purpose of reselling it might not be the best use of your time. Those willing to pay large sums of money for presidential memorabilia tend to prefer that of presidents like Lincoln, Jefferson, and Washington, according to Christie's. Plus, there's no telling how much something will be worth. Sure, this fall's campaign junk could eventually sell for thousands at an auction—or for pennies at your next yard sale.
-
Endorsements
from formerly coy John Edwards and the United Steelworkers for Obama
are two more nails in the Clinton coffin. Clinton's odds drop 1.1 to 1.8 percent.
Whatever momentum Clinton picked up from her 41-point West Virginia win
the Obama camp snuffed out with the Edwards coup de grâce. Edwards sat
on his endorsement until long after its game-changing power expired, so
the damage to Clinton's flicker of a campaign is more symbolic than
anything. The crux of his "everyone's doing it" speech last night in Michigan
was that he was mimicking the will of the voters. Because he waited,
Edwards' decision to finally choose a horse reinforces the "it's over"
story line. Watch this narrative get another boost next week when Obama
clinches the pledged delegate lead for good. (He'll hit a majority of
the 3,254 pledged delegates even if he narrowly loses Oregon.)
Read more at the Hillary Deathwatch.
-
Hillary Clinton will declare victory in the West Virginia primary tonight against a senator who no longer even considers himself her opponent. While Clinton is scheduled to be in Charleston, W.Va., for Election Night celebrations, Barack Obama will be in Missouri, a state that held its primary more than three months ago. His message couldn’t be clearer: He is now campaigning against John McCain.
This seems extraordinarily unwise. While one can argue the merits of downplaying an unwinnable battle against an opponent who can’t win the war, Obama stands the risk of alienating Democrats who do not yet support him. It resembles the familiar architecture of college rivalries; in order to belittle its counterpart, one school inevitably acts like it’s too good to even compete.
Here’s the speech Obama should be delivering tonight somewhere in West Virginia—say, Morgantown, where there’s a big university.
Some of you may be surprised to see me here tonight. For the past several weeks, it has been clear that Senator Clinton held a commanding lead in West Virginia, and I congratulate her on her victory tonight.
You know, a lot of the senior advisers in my campaign recommended that I skip West Virginia altogether. In fact, ever since we won North Carolina last week and fought to nearly a tie in Indiana, many people have advised that we shift the focus of the campaign to Senator McCain and the general election.
Now, I don’t mean to belittle the advice of the extraordinarily talented strategists on my campaign. Without them, we would not be here today. But let me be very clear: It would be a disservice to Senator Clinton and a disservice to the Democratic Party if we did not continue to compete in this primary as long as there are two strong candidates for the nomination.
In that spirit, I have come here tonight to thank those West Virginians who did vote for me and to say this to those who did not: In the event that I am the nominee for president in the fall, I would be honored to have your vote. I believe it is this preference for robust options in candidates that gave me the opportunity to succeed in this election, and I will not forget that.
Senator McCain will be a formidable opponent in the fall, and I understand the temptation to rev up the general election campaign as soon as possible. But charging into this important contest when the Democratic Party has yet to rally behind one candidate is, I think, unwise. So let me say it again: So long as there are two candidates, you will see me fighting for every vote in the remaining contests.
Idealistic and a tad sappy? Absolutely. To which I respond: When has that ever stopped him before? And as my fellow Trailheader Christopher Beam pointed out to me over by the coffee maker this morning, such a message from Obama might—just might—give Clinton a graceful note to end on.
-
Ever since Barack Obama started racking up primary and caucus wins after Super Tuesday, analysts have summed up Hillary Clinton’s prognosis with an odd statistic: the percent of the vote she needs in every remaining primary to catch up in pledged delegates.
Going into tonight, that margin was just over 69 percent. Based on current estimates for Indiana and North Carolina, by tomorrow morning it will be close to 85.
I should hasten to point out that this statistic has always been mostly meaningless since some states have many more delegates than others. But it’s a convenient way to express an ugly reality for Clinton: the longer this race goes on, the less time and fewer delegates she has with which to catch up.
One could argue that this is an unfair statistic; even the Clinton camp doesn’t argue that they can catch up to Obama in pledged delegates, and we’ve long surpassed the point where Obama could clinch the nomination even with 100 percent of the remaining vote.
But the statistic does remind us of this: The high-water mark for Clinton has risen after every contest, even after a win. After Obama won D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, she needed about 57 percent of the remaining vote; after March 4, it was 63 percent. Even when she picked up a net gain of 12 delegates in Pennsylvania, the mark inched up by a fraction of a percent, to 69. The finish line has simply outrun her.
-
Even as Hillary Clinton trails Barack Obama in pledged delegates, the popular vote, and number of states won, she has made it clear that she plans to stay in the race for the nomination. All of which brings me to this logical conclusion: It is time for Barack Obama to drop out.
If Clinton had the good of the Democratic Party in mind, she would have given up her bid the day after the Mississippi primary, which Obama won by 25 points. The delegate math was as dismal for her campaign then as it is now, even after Pennsylvania, and she was facing down a six-week gulf before the next election.
But Hillary Clinton isn’t going to drop out. There simply isn’t a function in her assembly code for throwing in the towel.
Obama, on the other hand, is fully capable of it. And if he’s really serious about representing a new kind of politics, now is the time for him to prove it in the only meaningful way left. Moreover, were he to play it right, dropping out now nearly guarantees that he’ll be elected president in 2012. Here’s the roadmap:
Obama drops out next week, stating that although he could almost certainly win the nomination by fighting it out until the convention in August, he is simply not willing to drag the party through a battle that will cripple its chances against John McCain. He then pledges to help support Sen. Clinton in her bid—with full knowledge that she will not take him up on the offer.
In one stroke, Obama will regain his messiah creds by making the ultimate sacrifice for the good of the party. His followers will be furious. The mere mention of Clinton’s name will provoke unspeakable acts. They will abandon Clinton in numbers sufficient to hand McCain the election in November.
Losing the presidency again after eight years of Bush will ruin the Democratic Party. It will become obvious that Clinton’s decision to stay in the race was the turning point in the election. The base will turn its wrath on party leaders like Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi, who failed to push Clinton out. Obama, as the de facto head of the party, will broker negotiations to install new leaders loyal to him.
McCain will be eminently more beatable in 2012. Demographics will continue to shift in Obama’s favor as his 14- to 17-year-old supporters come of voting age. Anyone foolish enough to challenge Obama for the nomination—and don’t rule out Clinton—will go nowhere. Obama’s utopian vision for a Democratic party unified around him will be complete. QED.
-
Hillary Clinton's shout-out to American Samoa after her defeat to Barack Obama in the South Carolina primary looks like it was worth it. As the Politico reports, the U.S. territory's caucuses broke in Clinton's favor, 163-121 (that's total people, not delegates), giving her a net gain of one delegate over opponent Barack Obama. Last week, Slate's Jon Rubin investigated the territory's voting rights.
Clinton is a candidate who knows how to say thank you. In her speech that just ended, she quickly mentioned the territory in conjunction with the continental states she picked up tonight.
Financial disclosure: Shortly before the speech, I challenged fellow Trailhead blogger Chadwick Matlin to a $1 bet over whether Clinton would mention the territory. I intend to hold him to this wager.