The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Nicky Berman | It ain't over till it's over

As pundits and political journalists across the country join the ranks of those urging Senator Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race for the nomination, they're making two huge mistakes.

First, and most importantly, we haven't voted yet! Maybe the media hasn't noticed, but the Pennsylvania primary is today, meaning the ever-so-patient voters of our great state have yet to make their voices heard. (Neither have the voters in nine other states, but we're less concerned about them at the moment.)

Second, they seem to be forgetting a fundamental principle of American democracy. Isn't this the United States, the land of opportunity, where every American has the right to pursue his or her dreams, through hard work and resolve?

As it is, our political system virtually shuts out any presidential candidate who doesn't hail from one of the two major parties. Now, by calling on the trailing candidate to kindly step aside and concede the race before it's over, the pundits want to narrow that field of opportunity even further.

Clinton has every right to continue running for president until the primary campaign is truly resolved. (I can see this even through the haze of 'Bamamania that's engulfed me.) To insist upon her withdrawal, "for the sake of the Democratic Party" or any other reason, is blatantly undemocratic.

Like it or not, neither candidate will be able to clinch the nomination through the results of the primary contests alone. After Montana becomes the last state to vote on June 3, neither will have reached the magic delegate number of 2,025. Obama may have secured leads in both the popular vote and delegate count, but in our Democratic primary system - like it or not - that's not sufficient to seal the nomination.

Alas, the abominable superdelegates will cast the all-important final votes, and these elite statesmen (and ambitious 20-somethings) don't have to make up their minds until the Convention in August. In other words, the race won't be truly over for a long, long time.

That leaves us - and the superdelegates - ample opportunity to learn more about the remaining candidates, to glean more evidence to inform decisions about who'll make the better president and who'll be the more formidable opponent to take on Senator McCain. Why cut the debate short?

Those calling for a Clinton withdrawal assert that this Dem-on-Dem fighting serves only to splinter the Party and increase McCain's chances of winning in November. The theory might sound plausible, but there's not enough evidence to prove it: Prolonged primary fights of the past offer no clear wisdom regarding how they affected the results of the general elections that followed.

Yes, it's true that Clinton and Obama are being forced to rebut attack after attack while McCain sits pretty, leisurely exploring the country on his get-to-know-you tour. But in the end, whoever wins the Democratic nomination will be well-served by this campaign warm-up session. We can be sure that any line of attack launched during the primaries will be replayed - and significantly beefed up - by the Republicans in the fall. But this time, the nominee will be ready, with substantial practice in deflection under his or her belt.

None of this implies that student groups shouldn't take sides in the debate.

When Penn Democrats endorsed Obama on March 5, Penn for Hillary felt marginalized, according to Julie Siegel, former Spin editor, College junior, and co-chairwoman of the group. "To cut off that debate was irresponsible," Siegel lamented, "and sort of unfortunate."

But an endorsement is not tantamount to a call for the non-endorsed candidate to drop out of the race.

"We still work very closely with Penn for Hillary," said Mukul Sharma, College sophomore and vice president of Penn Democrats. Sharma explained that his organization recognizes the importance and benefits of a continued discussion, and members have offered all they can to promote an ongoing debate between both candidates.

Throughout the last seven weeks, this campus has seen a vigorous debate between the Clinton and Obama camps.

The media should take notice: While they're free to express opinions and make endorsements, they can't call all the shots, and they shouldn't put an end to this race before it's over.

Nicky Berman is a College senior from Boston, Mass. Her e-mail is berman@dailypennsylvanian.com. Philly-Bustering appears alternating Tuesdays.

Comments (5)

While Hillary certainly has every right to stay in the race, the longer the primary race goes on, the more momentum John McCain will be able to build, which will ultimately result in another four scary years if he's successful. The race needs to end soon! If Hillary doesn't take a double digit win in Hillary she needs to bow out.

First, the premise of the column is obviously debatable. And argument can easily be made that when Hillary attacks Obama (which has obviously been a frequent occurrence), she is doing John McCain's job for him. However, the problem with this piece is that the conclusion is completely incoherent. First, you equate campus student groups with the media. The media, clearly, eschews "voicing opinions" and never "makes endorsements." And if they did, is the author implying that it is appropriate for CNN to make an endorsement? Lastly, the media is not forcing anyone out of the race. They are merely reporting on party leaders, such as Leahy, Dodd, Howard Dean, etc., who have hinted that Clinton should bow out for the good of the Party. Your bone to pick is with the Democratic Party, not the media.

DP, I disagree with you. Even if Hillary doesn't get the nomination (which I hope she does) a continued race is great for the Democratic party. If Obama is the eventual nominee he will benefit from having criss-crossed the state of Pennsylvania in the last month or so. We are one of the true battleground states and this primary race in particular will benefit either of the Dmeocratic nominees as it has given voters the opportunity to get to know them both. McCain will have to start from square one.

Go Nicky!

Points well made! The process, and the superdelegates, abominable or otherwise, help to prevent an imbalance of interests. Philadelphia is not Pennsylvania, and New York City is not New York: large metropolitan/urban areas could effectively cancel the interests of rural areas, and vice versa; ditto regional and state-specific concerns. Rendell and Nutter, for example, have a different understanding of the problems facing our city and state, as well as the capacity of each candidate's willingness and ability to address those problems, than do individuals like us, particularly college students, who might be voting simply because we like the idea of Obama or Clinton or McCain, how they look or talk. I don't know anyone who actually knows anything about their positions or their records, other than the idiotic sound bites about Wright or Bosnia or Obama's $9 million dollar ad campaign. Few of us really look into the issues; we vote pretty irresponsibly, in fact. The superdelegates and other checks and balances are meant to bring some equilibrium and knowledge to the process.

Comments are closed for this item.