The XX Factor: Slate women blog about politics, etc...

Hillary's Vision Quest and the Great Schism

Amen (so to speak), Dahlia and Melinda. My quick take-away was this: Hillary Clinton is trying to create an equation between her campaign and a kind of religious quest. She told her supporters that every vote of theirs was a "prayer." (So votes for Obama were what? Votes for the devil?) She implied that her supporters were "invisible" to everyone else. She stressed her dedication to public service. Softening her voice, she said she just wants what she had "always wanted," namely, to help fix health care and end the war. (Never mind that she voted for the war.) She animated the cultish, irrational mob impulse in her supporters. (It's no accident that one of the first "invisible" voters she mentioned was a nurse.) Then she said: "I want to hear from you. I hope you'll go to my web site HillaryClinton.com and. share your thoughts with me .... and in the coming days I'll be consulting with advisers and party learders to determine how to move forward."

Now, after that speech, how many supporters are really going to log in to her message boards and urge, "Bow out gracefully, Hill"? No; she's preparing us for the Great Schism. The moment when the Democratic Party, like the Catholic Church once did, breaks into two camps that can't reconcile their values.

Hillary's right, in a sense, that the way we elect our party nominees is a little ... complex. Even flawed. Sure. That's open for debate. But not WHILE the election is taking place. For better or for worse, we don't rewrite the rules midgame in American politics. Or at least we don't do that most of the time. And that's always been what made American democracy robust. The primary system is one the United States has followed for a long time. And Clinton doesn't get to change the rules midelection simply because they don't favor her. So I find it disingenuous—deeply, deeply disingenuous—that she claimed last night she really cares about "the deepest values of our party." Ours is a system of representative democracy. You don't get to throw a temper tantrum just because "your vote" wasn't "heard." After all, every time there is an election, some voters feel remorse that their candidates didn't win. If each of those candidates stirred up their supporters to the point where, as Dahlia put it, they looked ready to set off small brushfires, we'd be living in a much more violent country.

So you know what, Hillary? The deepest values of the party would suggest that you don't emotionally manipulate those who have less power and less authority than you. They would suggest that you don't stir voters into a moblike frenzy.They would place on you the burden of acting like a representativeup someone who can compromise gracefully, negotiate wisely, and be generous even when the world does not bow to your will. Instead, you're creating a schism within the Democratic Party. If you really think there's a problem with the way primaries are run, take it up after you bow out.