Yep, ABC, the "all 'bout Clinton" network, which has written a lovely little hit-piece on Obama called "Why Can't Obama Close the Deal?" Filled with suppositions, Clintonista quotes, and grade-A bovine digestive byproducts, it omits a simple question:
"If not Obama, then who?"
ABC (and others, who seem to be fully off Obama at this point) are focusing on Obama's various weaknesses with the "heartland". You know, the "heartland?" That part of America (supposedly) filled with low-brow whites that media types are completely unfamiliar with and thus lionize all the more?
It's nonsense if you look at it over time, his numbers have been improving with these demographics, but it's not important.
Here's what is. If not Obama, then who? Well, that's easy. Clinton.
And Hillary Clinton has been getting an easy, easy ride from the media these days. Even with that stupid Bosnia thing, they aren't asking the real question, which is what her weaknesses are. And yes, she has them, and people acknowledge it, but her main weakness is something they don't discuss: the convention itself.
It's been said before, but it bears repeating: she cannot win the pledged delegates. The Democratic primary system simply doesn't work like that. Screw the "math" line, people's eyes glaze over if you use that word, just acknowledge that she can't win the pledged delegates. The only way she can win is if the superdelegates override the pledged delegates.
And that would be disastrous. Everybody knows that. Nobody will admit it who isn't already in the Obama camp, but that would be disastrous. She'd be seen as illegitimate. She'd be seen as someone who couldn't even beat Obama. She'd be seen as everything negative about the Dems, with the media leading the charge.
(That's something she doesn't get. Every "strength" she has against Obama will become a weakness against McCain. The demos she wins against Obama would be automatically put in the "Maverick" camp by the media during the general. Even if she can win them, it will be portrayed as a weakness by the gatekeepers. And the "experience" and "judgement" arguments will be a bloodbath. That's one of the reasons Obama's a stronger candidate- he has answers to his deficiencies on those. She doesn't.)
In the wake of the convention, the Dems would fall apart. Blacks would stay home, and probably never come back. Progressives would stay home or go Green. Fundraising would flatten. Some bloggers would half-heartedly support the party, but would have received their own "fuck you" from the party as well. Many would probably bail out; not necessarily going Green, but focusing on local races and ignoring the presidential elephant in the room. The volunteer numbers would crater. It'd be a disaster. Clinton would lose, the 2008 advantage would be squandered, and the various factions in the party would blame each other for the loss.
THAT IS WHAT A CLINTON GENERAL ELECTION WOULD LOOK LIKE.
Sorry, but it is. By ignoring this ABC (and the rest) are lying to you by omission. We can't compare Obama against some platonic Democratic ideal, and we can't compare him against Hillary in a race that wasn't already decided. If Hillary had remained the frontrunner from the beginning, it'd be an entirely different scenario. If this were still a primary race, it'd be different too.
I'm not totally comfortable with Obama's policies, and I do think he made some mistakes in Pennsylvania, though not as many as the barking idiots seem to believe. But the decision is clear, as much as ABC and its ilk is trying to hide it. It's Obama, or it's mutually assured destruction. Those are the choices.