Why Obama is More Electable

My passion for Barack Obama is so strong that at times my emotion gets in the way of being an effective advocate for him. My attitude can be condescending or belittling toward Hillary Clinton supporters. I understand the passion that Democrats feel towards the Clintons and the frustration that's set in from the stinging defeats of 2000 and 2004. There is an intense anger towards Republicans for the incompetence of the Bush administration, the marginalization of dissenting opinion, and most of all the reckless and failed policies in Iraq. A feeling exists among Democrats that they cannot afford to place the fate in the 2008 election in the hands of an untested candidate like Barack Obama. Barack Obama, for all his inspiration and appeal, remains an unknown entity, particularly when contrasted with a name brand like the Clintons. There is merit to Hillary's argument that she's been "tested and vetted" by Republicans, that she has battle scars proving her mettle. Asking Democrats to "roll the dice" on an African American candidate like Obama (as President Clinton puts it) certainly requires some faith. Given that the proposed policies of the Clintons and Obama are strikingly similar, why should Democrats be willing to take that chance against a Republican party that has so successfully undercut the hopes of every Democratic presidential candidate not named Clinton?

Because Barack Obama is imminently more electable than Hillary Clinton and he has the ability to expand the party beyond its traditional base.

In order to win the White House, Democrats must win the votes of not only Democrats, but independents and Republicans. This means we must nominate a candidate whose appeal is larger than the base. We need to win in red states. It's already a given the Democrats will vote for Obama or Clinton, just as they voted for Gore and Kerry in 2000 and 2004. Democrats lost those elections because independents voted for the Repubilcans. What's not a given is that independents will vote for Clinton. Certainly now is a unique moment for Democrats in their campaign against Republicans. The traditional Republican coalition of economic/fiscal conservatives, social conservatives and military hawks is splintering. This has been the glue of Republican dominance since the Regan administration and its demise is an opportunity that Democrats cannot expect to see again. Now is the moment to appeal to those Republicans disillusioned by the failures of their party and their weak pool of presidential candidates. Barack Obama can do this. This is not merely speculation or a haughty, hopeful talk about bridging a partisan divide. The results of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina conclusively show that Obama's appeal among Independents and Republicans is greatly superior to Hillary Clintons. In winning South Carolina's primary Saturday, for example, Obama drew 42 percent of voters describing themselves as independents, compared with 26 percent for Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to exit polls (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j0uMEYpasAyQ4CDIpXsMAbhzSy6QD8UECN4O1). Nevada won 47% of independents versus Clintons 33%. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21225994/. And in NH, Obama grabbed more independents voting in the Democratic primary, 41 percent to 34 percent (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/08/nh.issues/).

There is no question that the Clintons are immensely popular among Democrats. One would be hard pressed to think of more beloved politicians within the party. Outside the party however, amongst Independents and Republicans, the story is very, very different. Many of my friends, whose admiration for the Clintons runs extremely deep, have admitted that they have very few Republican or Independent friends. For better or for worse, I have been predominately surrounded by Republicans for the better part of my life. What's unmistakably clear is the vitriol the Clintons inspire in them. Although most of it may be undeserved, it remains a political reality. Obama's appeal to Republicans is not a fairy tale - many have privately admitted to me that between Obama and say Mitt Romney, they would vote for Obama. Yet under no circumstance would these self described Republicans pull the level for a Clinton. The Clintons remain the most polarizing figures in American politics and in Obama we have a candidate who by all accounts transcends our party. What Obama offers is a rebranding of the party, bringing it forward into the future and transforming the way non-Democrats view the party. Essentially, he can be to us what Ronald Regan was to Republicans – a transcendent figure whose appeal reaches beyond the traditional sphere of Democrats. The Clintons, for all their triumphs represent the Democrats of the past that paved the political road for two terms of George W. Bush. We cannot squander this opportunity by nominating a candidate who serves only to unite a broken Republican party.