Richard Whalen

Senator Hillary Clinton, initially perceived as the “inevitable” nominee, is now scrambling to gain competitive parity against the extraordinary momentum of the former underdog, Senator Barack Obama who now declares himself to be the leader of “the New American Majority.”

In a decision reminiscent of Rudy Giuliani, Clinton has chosen to ignore the upcoming primaries in Hawaii and Wisconsin (February 19) and is now pinning all of her hopes on Ohio and Texas.

And belatedly, Hillary Clinton is taking up specific causes and promises – a $9.50 an hour minimum wage; a national heath care system as good as the Congressional plan; creation of “millions of good new jobs”. She is striving to be seen as the champion of older, less affluent Americans and her new message borrows freely from the populist themes of ex-Senator John Edwards.

Obama now leads in terms of primaries won and is almost dead-even in terms of delegates – 1,259 – 1,210, according to RealClearPolitics. Most important, he is expected to further humiliate Clinton in Wisconsin and Hawaii. Those victories will further fuel his momentum as they battle it out decisively on March 4 in Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont. If he wins Texas or Ohio or both, he will have the nomination within his grasp.

If the Democrats deadlock at their convention and are forced to turn to their unelected super-delegates, some 800 party officeholders, present and past, functionaries, and hangers-on, it will be a self-made disastrous breaking of their promise of an open intra-party democracy.

Here is the situation I see: Clinton and her husband overestimated the country’s willingness to tolerate them for another eight years. Her $5 million “loan” to her campaign is a naked admission of money troubles and power people deserting her. And the mistake of firing her Latina campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle instantly backfired. Angry Hispanics now accuse her of disloyalty.

Obama could clinch the nomination on March 4th. Can Hillary be a graceful loser? I doubt it. More likely, she will be a vindictive one.

The possibility of Obama and Clinton running together, as rivals JFK and LBJ did in 1960, is doubtful because the competing “firsts” of race and gender cannot be compromised practically. And today, there are no plausible bosses to be peacemakers -- someone with old Joe Kennedy’s or Sam Rayburn’s authority. And I think John Edwards is Obama’s best bet for Veep.

Obama can beat McCain, but Clinton cannot. Democrats will sweep the Congressional races. Depending on the depth and severity of the 2008 economic slowdown, and the sulking of non-voting disgruntled anti-McCain conservatives, I see an Obama victory that will range from unexpectedly comfortable to a landslide. And the Democrats will make truly landslide gains in the Congress, achieving 60-plus votes in the Senate -- enough to cut off debate -- and a gain of 20-25 seats in the House. This will confirm the 2006 election results mark the beginning of a new era of Democratic presidential ascendancy.