The numbers and common sense dictate that the Democratic Party’s nomination process will come down to the wire, with Hillary Clinton employing a three-step strategy very consistent with her nature and background.

Losing Not An Option

Everyone who knows Hillary Clinton describes a ruthlessly ambitious person who will do anything and everything to get what she wants.  One of those people, Dick Morris, has repeatedly stated that she will pull out all stops to seize the nomination of her party from Barack Obama, by whatever means possible.  It will not matter how far she may be in delegates, or what party unity will dictate.  While Hillary Clinton would obviously prefer to grab the nomination the usual way, she has shown no pattern of folding up her tent when “the usual way” is not in the cards.

Since losing is not an option for Hillary, it will not be a question for her as to “if” she will ultimately grab the nomination, but more likely “how”.  This is where her three-step plan comes into effect.

Trivialize, Patronize and Racialize

The Clintons love to have third parties do their bidding and then appear to step away from that bidding, even daring to use their own ploy to again portray themselves as victims.  Hillary did this regarding the recent Geraldine Ferraro statements about Obama, first saying that she did not condone them and then adding, by the way, that she has also been a victim of personal swipes. The Clinton ploy of having some supporter do their bidding, answer by saying that they do not agree with what was said or done, and then doing nothing serves the purpose of having someone else get out those messy messages they want to dish out.

By first suggesting that Obama is inexperienced, then offering a running mate position to him almost as if mocking his present leader status and then having an underling suggest that Obama is lucky to be black or else he would be trivial, the Clintons have effectively patronized and trivialized him while injecting race into the picture, all through indirect means, of course, so as to be able to spread their dirt without getting their hands dirty.

For a party that loves to paint itself as racially noble, the Democratic Party sure is showing its historically racist background.  Remember that, despite Democratic efforts to ignore the facts, this is the party that created the KKK, obstructed the very civil rights legislation it now worships and generally does not practice what it preaches racially. Putting aside all of the rhetoric from so-called “civil rights leaders” and the NAACP, all firmly in the Democratic Party’s pocket, one need only look at two examples of this Democratic racial lip service.

First, note how Democrats bowed to their teachers’ union constituency by killing school vouchers in Florida despite the fact that these had already been helping children from racial minorities climb out of their respective public school disasters.  Second, who appointed more racial minorities to high government positions, Bush or Clinton?

The bottom line is that Hillary knows that she can benefit from racial division within the party, and she is intent on capitalizing on that opportunity.  One need only look at how racially polarized the recent Mississippi primary vote was to see just how divisive this campaign can be.

Big Fish and Arm Twisting

Many observers believe that Part A of Hillary’s second tactic in this three-step strategy is to argue that she has proven she can win big states like California, New York, Texas and Ohio, which are all needed for a victory in November.  Despite being behind in delegates and states right now, she knows that she will be “close enough” entering the convention.

 In all likelihood, the 2008 Democratic nomination will come down to who is chosen by the super delegates, who have indicated that they will lean toward the candidate they feel has the best chance to win in November, regardless of delegate and state numbers. 

In reality, those super delegates will not dare take away that nomination from an Obama way out in front, hence Hillary’s need to be “close enough” to prevent these super delegates from being blasted for stealing the nomination from Obama.

It is here that we find Part B of Hillary’s second tactic.  Dick Morris has observed that Hillary will stop at nothing to twist the arms of enough super delegates to secure the nomination, even digging up dirt and using other strong-arm tactics to gain their votes.

By securing victories in the Michigan and Florida makeup primaries, Hillary will have fortified her “big state” argument and will probably enter the convention in a virtual draw with Obama.  Yes, he will likely have won more states and might even have won more votes, but since when does winning a majority of voters matter to a Clinton victory?

By first being close enough and strong enough to make many super delegates more comfortable in choosing her, and then giving any necessary super delegates the “Clinton treatment”, Hillary Clinton will win the super delegate vote.

Battle of Attrition

Hillary Clinton’s final strategy for securing her party’s nomination is as simple as plain to those who know her best.  Barack Obama may be an effective speaker. He may provide that fresh face of change that many in his party seem to be seeking. However, few if any candidates have the stomach, determination and raw street-fighting temperament of a Hillary Clinton.  She will make it clear from the start that she will not give up this nomination, and that she will be willing to drag the proceedings to whatever place is necessary to secure it.

Already, polls show that many of Obama’s supporters would support Hillary while far few of Hillary’s would support Obama.  She knows that, in a battle of attrition, she will ultimately win.  Her ultimate hope is to put Obama in a corner where he will either have to surrender the nomination to her and, perhaps, accept a running mate position; or, in the alternative, appear to be selfish and stubborn, ignoring the overall “good” of the nation in the service of his ego.

Here lies the utter political genius of the Clinton camp.  They can practice blatant hypocrisy, dirty politics, cynical deception and a total disregard for anything other than their ruthless ambition, and paint the other guy as the one guilty of just those things.

Placed in a position of possibly being blamed for harming Democratic chances in November, Obama might just blink and accept the running mate position or, at least, step out of the way for Hillary.

Conclusion

This is not about painting Barack Obama as some innocent victim of the Clinton machine that is about to run over him despite the present reality.  In the end, his inexperience and often radically liberal views, along with whatever dirt or issues the Clintons will push in his face, will bring about his downfall.

The point here is to illustrate that ultimate victory often goes to the one most willing, most determined and most experienced in practicing ruthless cunning, raw ambition and dirty tactics. The Clintons have her mysterious tax returns and tons of Arab money enriching them yearly, and perhaps Obama will try to shed attention on that.  They have all of the shady dealings of Bill’s administration, and Obama has not been able to do much with that. 

In the end, the person with the most gall, the most blatant daring and the least hesitation to utter absurd hypocrisy as if fact will win, and Hillary Clinton owns those traits over Barack Obama, hands down.

Copyright by Gabriel Garnica