What Now.

Perhaps nothing has been as weird this political season as the ending of it.

I'm not sad; really I'm not. I said a month ago that this was probably the likely outcome, and my mind, at least, made peace with it... even if, as it turned out, the denouement was like nothing I've ever seen.

Ever. It seems bizarre to me that we will wind up nominating the guy who only kind of managed to pull it together. Since March 4th - don't worry, I'll get to the "prior to March 4th" part in a moment - Hillary Clinton won 9 of 15 contests. She led the total vote in these contests 52.3% to 47.6%, and some 600,000 votes. These things, usually, are referred to as momentum. But of course, no candidate has so had to work twice as hard to be thought half as good. I'm not pretending here, or wishing. This isn't sour grapes. Really. I know that prior to March 4th, Barack Obama attained what turned out to be, if only in small measure, an insurmountable lead in delegates and even votes (battling to essentially a tie in that regard); and I'm comfortable admitting - we need to, really - that Clinton's flawed start is what made her final, fairly brilliant run, so disconcerting.

Why couldn't she have done it sooner? Or from the start?

It's purely happenstance that I pulled up the post I wrote - in January of last year - discussing Clinton's initial announcement of her run for President (the "chat from the couch" announcement). If you think I was thrilled with her from the start, have I got news for you:

People need to take the notion of a Hillary Clinton win seriously, and I'm not sure everyone does just yet, whether because they see her as carrying too much negative baggage or because they're sure a woman can't win.   I think she can win... and I'm not necessarily happy about it.  I don't think most of us have any idea where she stands on issues, or what policies she plans to pursue; and given her penchant for talky non-answers that dance around serious topics, we're not likely to get much more clarity anytime soon.  That's what a front-runner does.  And while it's wonderful to see a calm, confident woman take center stage, it's reasonable to ask what sort of Clintonian centrism comes attached to it - a centrism that Denocrats may no longer need quite so much of anymore.  But in order to close the deal - at least for me - Mrs. Clinton needs to be much more clear and direct about what she wants to do, and less into making this yet another "us vs. them" battle, as much as like her willingness to jump in and mix it up.

It's odd to me to see how much has changed since then (not the least of which is that I rarely link to Pandagon anymore - even dead ones) - back then, I really never envisioned being a Hillary Clinton supporter. I thought Barack Obama would eventually give a speech that moved me... or John Edwards would pull it together and change my impression of him.

Actually, frankly, what I really figured would happen is that I would get to vote for Dennis Kucinish while the "big three" battled it out inconclusively, no one of them strong enough to push the others out, but not so weakened as to leave; I figured the race would go longer than "super duper Tuesday" but not as long as it did... and I figured eventually Edwards or Obama would figure out how to unite or declare a truce long enough to get Clinton out.

I'm telling you this because I never expected to be here: I never expected to call myself a Hillary Clinton supporter, never expected a fairly innocent, and really mostly practical decision to change so much - my blogging life, the things I read and sources I trust, or re-kindle, so strongly, my feminist drives. I can't be angry about how this turned out. I just thought Hillary Clinton would make a great President. I still do.

But our nominee will be Barack Obama. She's said it, and it was for her to say. And so, the question is... what now? What do I do with all that's changed? What do I do with the concerns I have - concerns I share with other Clinton supporters - about Barack Obama?

I don't know. Not yet anyway. I think of these things as a journey and my journey to figuring out Barack Obama's candidacy is starting. My choices in this, though, are really not about emotion. They are practical conerns, about the issues, about what I expect from leaders, and from my government. I didn't pick Hillary Clinton because I liked her; I picked her because I thought she would work on the issues I care about. I don't hate Barack Obama.

I know a lot of people are still struggling with things that are settled in my mind. I respect any Clinton supporter who, even now, feels compelled to consider alternatives. I will say this, though: if you are the Democrats I think you are, you're not going to find what you want with the Republicans, or John McCain. But by all means, I think anyone should explore and consider before making a decision. Me, I can't vote Green (it's the Nader thing)... and even if I could, I can't vote for Cynthia McKinney.

I'm a Democrat. I vote for Democrats. And when I don't, I need a solution that makes sense. Right now, what makes sense... is probably Barack Obama. But we shall see. Let's keep looking, shall we? And I promise - I'm not here to tell you what to do. Because no one's going to tell me what to do, either.

Comments

[elmey]

I like what you said, let's keep seeing how things unfold. I won't be voting for McCain, but there are issues that are very important to me that are leaving the stage with Hillary. Maybe Obama will find his way to addressing them, maybe not--I obviously prefer that he does. I'm in a blue state though, so I have the luxury of indulging in a third party vote if that's where things lead.

It's funny, I didn't start out as a Hillary supporter either, I was ambivalent about all three of the top candidates through most of the debates. Hillary turned out to be the most solid, well prepared, and in the end, inclusive. Like you, I certainly don't hate Obama, but I'm still looking for the substance I'd like to see--there's time.

[Redstar]

I've got a somewhat similar, ruminative (is that a word?) post in my head.

I also have a theory that folks who got on the HRC train late are the ones least likely to come around. But I'm not sure it's true...

Probably not coincidentally, since we tend to think similarly in some ways, I also re-read your post this morning, while I was re-reading my own, while I think about what's next for me, for The Hillary 1000, what we should expect to see and ask to see going forward. I may or may not take the weekend off before I get it all out.

[FitnessNerd]

I made a post like this today (in which I stole two paragraphs from you), but I'm totally in the same spot as you. I can't bring myself to vote for anyone else, but Obama still has an amazing amount of ground to cover before he gets my wholehearted support. We'll see if he can do it...my gut is he can't.

[David Parsons]

I'm not going to reward bad behavior. If the Democratic Party gets away with this shit, they'll keep doing it. And after sawing off and abandoning women, I shudder to think what the next sacrifice will be.

I loathe the Evil Party, but if my voting an Evil Party ticket could cause the Democrats to lose races, I'll do it. Failing that, I'll just vote SPUSA and/or Green for the forseeable future.

[pocochina]

It's so interesting to see where people came from with this. I never had a question where she stood - I knew she was a bit further to the right to me on some issues, but was the most committed candidate on my most important issues, and had far and away the most fighting spirit. Like you said, it was practical, but it's become emotional, as well, at least in part because of the utter demonization of those of us who voted for her. (Nice that the link was to a post about "sHillary," maybe I shouldn't have been so shocked at all the Pandagon disappointment lately.)

[scottreads]

Like you, I didn't really warm to Clinton early. I was an Edwards guy who wanted the party to be more liberal on economics and more willing to fight for the powerless against the established interests. But after he dropped out and after giving Obama a shot I drifted to her because she seemed way more willing to fight for those things than Obama was. So I'm sad at the way things turned out, especially when it was powerfully assisted by a heapin' helpin' of made-in-America down-home misogyny.

But I can't go the route some folks at the Confluence and elsewhere are going. I can't convince myself that either voting for McCain and sitting on my hands and accepting the chance that he'd win as a result are morally acceptable. This is a guy who thinks that killing hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq for no good reason was A-ok and that potentially we need to do a lot more of it. I just can't get my mind around the idea that electing him or facilitating his election by sitting out is a good way to protest the undeniably shabby way that supporters of Hillary have been treated. I understand the feelings behind that and the impulse to strike back, but I just can't help feeling that the only people who'd get hurt would be another several thousand dead American servicemen and servicewomen and many thousands more uncomprehending foreigners struck down out of a clear blue sky by St. John the Maverick. I support the right of everybody to process their sadness and disappointment their own way and for as long as they want, considering their options, but I desperately hope and plead that the option we choose won't be one that leads to more war and heartbreaking human loss. I literally pray it won't come to that. Peace!

[Steve Barnes]

I have to say that it's rather odd to watch the economy head off on what looks like a rapid-fire nosedive at the very point when Sen. Clinton exits the race. Because, whatever their differences are, neither McCain nor Obama seem to know one thing about the economy, how it works or why things have gotten so screwed up to begin with. Maybe I'm just a little too old for hero worship, but I really think we're at a point in this country's history when we need a wonk, someone who can just get down to work and solve a few massive problems. "Change" or "another hundred years" aren't going to do it. A competent manager, which I find myself a little surprised to think that Hillary is, seemed to be the only possibility, and I don't really know where my political energy will go now that that possibility is gone.

[Mark Woods]

Great post. I share a similar acceptance of the current moment, which has a few of my loved ones tearing up over Hillary's speech.

I for one won't budge an inch to release my disdain for Obama until and only if he chooses Hillary as VP.

Then and only then will I agree to considering giving the Democrats my vote. And if he doesn't then I'll probably leave the party for good.

[Barry]

Weboy, I'd add that Clinton lost, having come into the race with a large boatload of advantages. If your starting team payroll was huge, you've got the home field advantage, and more influence on the pre-season rules negotiations than your opponent, and still lose, there is no 'close' about it.