After Pennsylvania: Flawed Democrat Campaign
Rizwan Ghani
April 24, 2008
Pennsylvania as predicted in article Pennsylvania vote has been won by Hillary. It wasn´t much of prediction because everyone expected Hillary to win. Obama campaign did a good job because the results show that Obama has maintained his lead in pledged delegates. Before Pa. vote, Obama had 138 more pledged delegates (Obama 1645, Hillary 1507). After the Pa. vote Obama still is still leading the race with 137 pledged delegates to his credit (Obama 1713, Hillary 1586).
It shows that both campaigns after six weeks of campaigning and pouring in millions of dollars have failed to win over the American voters. It shows the formidability of challenge for the both campaigns to convince an average American voter who has already made up his or her mind. It also helps to understand why Hillary is still in the race and the challenge Obama faces to ´close the deal´.
Well that is what an average TV anchor and main stream press would like America to believe. But the fact of the matter is the persistence of race and electability debate at this stage of primaries only points to one thing: How removed the democrats campaign is from real issues. In turn explaining how non-issues end up driving the campaigns resulting in mudslinging etc.
I have been soliciting since long that unless Obama campaign or for that matter Hillary camp stick to issues he or she will not be able to ´close the deal´. Pa. was a test case and both failed. Hillary failed because she couldn´t win all ten primaries and Obama because he has not increased his lead.
Pa. is a state where blue-collar jobs have vanished. Manufacturing sector is struggling. The voters wanted concrete solutions which both candidates failed to provide. Hillary may has won few hearts by reviving memories of good old 80´s but by the end of the day it was hard realities that overshadowed the festivity that primary brought to Pa. The voters knew that pouring in of money and public show of sincerity to their plight was but a display that would like a theatre in the city would pack up and move on leaving behind poverty and its prisoners.
But in all this doom and gloom scenario is hiding a goldmine of truth that Pa. presents to an average visitor with its glitzy buildings hosting health insurance, real estate tycoons and remnants of manufacturing lords.
Pa. was the battleground of ´neo-classicism´ (demand and supply system: high demand high prices and vice a versa regardless of production cost and no check on profit, salaries and negative impact on society) and Marxism or call it socialism (production cost, labor cost, profit usually under fifteen percent. In other words it is not related to demand and supply rather production cost, reasonable profit usually five percent with balance in labor costs including salaries kept proportionately with total profit of five to fifteen percent to help even distribution in the society) that neither candidate dared to touch.
If I were to interpret Hillary´s ´tide is turning´ victory call it would mean that as supporter of ´neo-classicism´ Hillary, the harbinger of ´status-quo´ she has no plans to change the fate of average Pa. single mother and blue collar worker earning less struggling to make both ends meet and will leave them to the mercy of market economy. Hillary camp is not offering any state support for these workers, which has national implication.
It is a conservative characteristic that distinguishes Democrats and Republicans. Hillary as a democrat is not ready to hold Principles of Liberalism in accordance to 1936 US Supreme Court decision where the Court sustained one act of New Deal legislation after another, asserting that individual citizens must be protected against overpowering economic groups and from disasters they have not brought on themselves. Legislative enactments provided for old-age and survivors insurance, unemployment insurance, federal control of various financial interests, minimum wages, supervision of agricultural production, and the right of labor unions to organize and bargain collectively (Liberalism by Peter Gay, Encarta 2008). If she ends up in the in the White House her rule could well be the continuation of Bush´s third term in office.
Similarly, Hillary´s position on global, regional alliances including NAFTA could be taken as progress towards one world government leaving little space for labor unions. It leaves two challenges for average American: 1) it takes away powers of an average voter in decision making in larger picture. 2) it leaves him or her jobless because of decision made in Washington without recognizing ground realities. It was Washington that changed steel policy and it is average Pa. who is paying the price. It was Washington that allowed import of cars that has left country´s car industry struggling.
Next, the growing economic divide between occupiers of glitzy buildings and struggling neighborhoods in Pa. is the challenge that Democrats have to address in which rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer. I will not categorize the divide in form of capitalism and socialism. I want the democrats to address the issue on the basis of logic. The people should be paid enough for their eight hour shift to allow them to take care of their life, retirement, health and dreams, which current American economic system has failed to deliver.
The 107 million Americans without health care insurance, 55 million Americans living below national poverty levels of $22,000 dollars annual income, 2 million victims of foreclosures and rising, every third American working double shift to make ends meet while few and few people at the top of pyramid end up with global resources are cases in point.
If Hillary camp has failed to amicably address the issues including old-age and survivors insurance; unemployment insurance; federal control of various financial interests; minimum wages; supervision of agricultural production; and the right of labor unions to organize and bargain collectively the Obama camp has equally disappointed.
Pa. was the battleground for Obama camp to announce 10 dollar an hour wages. It was the place to tell America that salary ratio of employer and employee will be fixed at 7:1. It was a place to tell America that medicine prices will be reduced including scrapping of current purchasing system that is draining national exchequer of tax dollars.
Pa. was a place to challenge the Republican psyche supporting hierarchy over equality, collective values over individualism, divine or natural law over secular law. It was the time to give a rallying call against McCain and his Republican supporters supporting status quo, endorsing the prevailing distribution of power, wealth and social standing.
A natural elite represented by McCain, Bush and their Republican conservative supporters who by virtue of birth, wealth, and education believe only they can provide the leadership. Hillary by pitching experience as battle cry of election campaign could in a way be termed as Republican reincarnation in Democratic setup. Her failure as democrat to successfully challenge above referred economic and political conservative philosophies supported by the Republicans with respect to welfare of an average American against corporate America shows that life of an average American will not change for good. Thereby questioning the very concept of elections in a democracy that promise change. Unfortunately, Obama camp is equally struggling to address the real issues and Pa. vote has yet again proved by assertions.
Pa. vote, the failure of candidates to win big and ´seal the deal´ show that Democratic Party candidates need to deal with issues and offering practical solutions not attacking characters and personalities. The Pa. vote shows that the divide within party is far from over which will harm the party in its face off with the Republicans in national election. It is a sad end to weeks of preparation and millions of dollars spent. Will Indiana, North Carolina primaries see change in direction of Obama, Hillary campaigns only time will tell.
Pa. in my view shows that the Conservatives and Republicans are winning the day because Democrats have failed to stop them from following Burke´s doctrine that allows limited governmental controls calculated to avoid malfunctions and frictions among the various groups and to moderate economic strife and competition. Bush´s stimulus package is more of a gloss over than public relief package to cover wide differences—extreme wealth on the one hand and poverty on the other. Something so ignorantly supported by Democrats and in the process squandered an opportunity to bring to book the Wall Street, banking sector, health care, defense spending and policymaking; mortgage meltdown, credit crisis and Katrina to recoup individual and community losses of main street.
In terms of tax debate, I can only hope that prophecies of impending 123% tax increase due to two wars and dollar devaluation are false. However, the question mark remains as Democrats fail to protect average American´s interest as Republicans lullaby nation through unending unconstitutional war with tax dollars to protect corporate America´s interests and in the process denying ´right to life´ to rest of the world in accordance to "UN Human Rights Charter" which is yet to be ratified by the Capitol Hill, London, Kabul, Istanbul, Baghdad and Islamabad.
Finally, Pa. has once again shown that Democrats are going to allow Republicans to: 1) continue with Darwin´s philosophy of ´survival of fittest´ within America and in the process denying state protection to millions of average Americans left at the mercy of corporate America. 2) In step with 19th century, American nationalism sentiment echoed by Regan and McCain as "manifest destiny" to guide and educate "lesser" peoples in the world to continue Iraq and Afghan wars as part of colonial policy for the United States.
It shows that both campaigns after six weeks of campaigning and pouring in millions of dollars have failed to win over the American voters. It shows the formidability of challenge for the both campaigns to convince an average American voter who has already made up his or her mind. It also helps to understand why Hillary is still in the race and the challenge Obama faces to ´close the deal´.
Well that is what an average TV anchor and main stream press would like America to believe. But the fact of the matter is the persistence of race and electability debate at this stage of primaries only points to one thing: How removed the democrats campaign is from real issues. In turn explaining how non-issues end up driving the campaigns resulting in mudslinging etc.
I have been soliciting since long that unless Obama campaign or for that matter Hillary camp stick to issues he or she will not be able to ´close the deal´. Pa. was a test case and both failed. Hillary failed because she couldn´t win all ten primaries and Obama because he has not increased his lead.
Pa. is a state where blue-collar jobs have vanished. Manufacturing sector is struggling. The voters wanted concrete solutions which both candidates failed to provide. Hillary may has won few hearts by reviving memories of good old 80´s but by the end of the day it was hard realities that overshadowed the festivity that primary brought to Pa. The voters knew that pouring in of money and public show of sincerity to their plight was but a display that would like a theatre in the city would pack up and move on leaving behind poverty and its prisoners.
But in all this doom and gloom scenario is hiding a goldmine of truth that Pa. presents to an average visitor with its glitzy buildings hosting health insurance, real estate tycoons and remnants of manufacturing lords.
Pa. was the battleground of ´neo-classicism´ (demand and supply system: high demand high prices and vice a versa regardless of production cost and no check on profit, salaries and negative impact on society) and Marxism or call it socialism (production cost, labor cost, profit usually under fifteen percent. In other words it is not related to demand and supply rather production cost, reasonable profit usually five percent with balance in labor costs including salaries kept proportionately with total profit of five to fifteen percent to help even distribution in the society) that neither candidate dared to touch.
If I were to interpret Hillary´s ´tide is turning´ victory call it would mean that as supporter of ´neo-classicism´ Hillary, the harbinger of ´status-quo´ she has no plans to change the fate of average Pa. single mother and blue collar worker earning less struggling to make both ends meet and will leave them to the mercy of market economy. Hillary camp is not offering any state support for these workers, which has national implication.
It is a conservative characteristic that distinguishes Democrats and Republicans. Hillary as a democrat is not ready to hold Principles of Liberalism in accordance to 1936 US Supreme Court decision where the Court sustained one act of New Deal legislation after another, asserting that individual citizens must be protected against overpowering economic groups and from disasters they have not brought on themselves. Legislative enactments provided for old-age and survivors insurance, unemployment insurance, federal control of various financial interests, minimum wages, supervision of agricultural production, and the right of labor unions to organize and bargain collectively (Liberalism by Peter Gay, Encarta 2008). If she ends up in the in the White House her rule could well be the continuation of Bush´s third term in office.
Similarly, Hillary´s position on global, regional alliances including NAFTA could be taken as progress towards one world government leaving little space for labor unions. It leaves two challenges for average American: 1) it takes away powers of an average voter in decision making in larger picture. 2) it leaves him or her jobless because of decision made in Washington without recognizing ground realities. It was Washington that changed steel policy and it is average Pa. who is paying the price. It was Washington that allowed import of cars that has left country´s car industry struggling.
Next, the growing economic divide between occupiers of glitzy buildings and struggling neighborhoods in Pa. is the challenge that Democrats have to address in which rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer. I will not categorize the divide in form of capitalism and socialism. I want the democrats to address the issue on the basis of logic. The people should be paid enough for their eight hour shift to allow them to take care of their life, retirement, health and dreams, which current American economic system has failed to deliver.
The 107 million Americans without health care insurance, 55 million Americans living below national poverty levels of $22,000 dollars annual income, 2 million victims of foreclosures and rising, every third American working double shift to make ends meet while few and few people at the top of pyramid end up with global resources are cases in point.
If Hillary camp has failed to amicably address the issues including old-age and survivors insurance; unemployment insurance; federal control of various financial interests; minimum wages; supervision of agricultural production; and the right of labor unions to organize and bargain collectively the Obama camp has equally disappointed.
Pa. was the battleground for Obama camp to announce 10 dollar an hour wages. It was the place to tell America that salary ratio of employer and employee will be fixed at 7:1. It was a place to tell America that medicine prices will be reduced including scrapping of current purchasing system that is draining national exchequer of tax dollars.
Pa. was a place to challenge the Republican psyche supporting hierarchy over equality, collective values over individualism, divine or natural law over secular law. It was the time to give a rallying call against McCain and his Republican supporters supporting status quo, endorsing the prevailing distribution of power, wealth and social standing.
A natural elite represented by McCain, Bush and their Republican conservative supporters who by virtue of birth, wealth, and education believe only they can provide the leadership. Hillary by pitching experience as battle cry of election campaign could in a way be termed as Republican reincarnation in Democratic setup. Her failure as democrat to successfully challenge above referred economic and political conservative philosophies supported by the Republicans with respect to welfare of an average American against corporate America shows that life of an average American will not change for good. Thereby questioning the very concept of elections in a democracy that promise change. Unfortunately, Obama camp is equally struggling to address the real issues and Pa. vote has yet again proved by assertions.
Pa. vote, the failure of candidates to win big and ´seal the deal´ show that Democratic Party candidates need to deal with issues and offering practical solutions not attacking characters and personalities. The Pa. vote shows that the divide within party is far from over which will harm the party in its face off with the Republicans in national election. It is a sad end to weeks of preparation and millions of dollars spent. Will Indiana, North Carolina primaries see change in direction of Obama, Hillary campaigns only time will tell.
Pa. in my view shows that the Conservatives and Republicans are winning the day because Democrats have failed to stop them from following Burke´s doctrine that allows limited governmental controls calculated to avoid malfunctions and frictions among the various groups and to moderate economic strife and competition. Bush´s stimulus package is more of a gloss over than public relief package to cover wide differences—extreme wealth on the one hand and poverty on the other. Something so ignorantly supported by Democrats and in the process squandered an opportunity to bring to book the Wall Street, banking sector, health care, defense spending and policymaking; mortgage meltdown, credit crisis and Katrina to recoup individual and community losses of main street.
In terms of tax debate, I can only hope that prophecies of impending 123% tax increase due to two wars and dollar devaluation are false. However, the question mark remains as Democrats fail to protect average American´s interest as Republicans lullaby nation through unending unconstitutional war with tax dollars to protect corporate America´s interests and in the process denying ´right to life´ to rest of the world in accordance to "UN Human Rights Charter" which is yet to be ratified by the Capitol Hill, London, Kabul, Istanbul, Baghdad and Islamabad.
Finally, Pa. has once again shown that Democrats are going to allow Republicans to: 1) continue with Darwin´s philosophy of ´survival of fittest´ within America and in the process denying state protection to millions of average Americans left at the mercy of corporate America. 2) In step with 19th century, American nationalism sentiment echoed by Regan and McCain as "manifest destiny" to guide and educate "lesser" peoples in the world to continue Iraq and Afghan wars as part of colonial policy for the United States.
Print
Email
