The XX Factor: What women really think.

Pass the Popcorn

OK, Melinda, I'll fess up. On the one hand, I am definitely ready for this to be over. (And it looks as if Tom Hanks agrees with us.) But, from a partisan standpoint, it is kind of fun to watch Barack and Hillary do John McCain's dirty work for him. (Saves him some money, too.) It's funny to me how, not that long ago, the talk was that the Republican Party was in "disarray" because three different candidates had won primaries. I didn't think that at all. We had three candidates who appealed to different, even conflicting segments of the party, and we had to decide what direction we were going in. It was a healthy debate (or, maybe we just all picked the guy we thought could win in November, and we'll resume the infighting in four or eight years when the hard-core righties take off their noseplugs). Which makes it amusing to watch the Democrats expend so much energy trying to choose between two candidates who are so similar on policy that it really does come down to personality and character.

But, as I mentioned yesterday, I think eight months is an eternity. And until we get to the general election, we won't know whether John McCain is going to come across as the man who can unite us, while at the same time scaring the baddies, or as another Bob Dole—an aging American hero who got his chance too late. And we don't know whether Obama can keep up the hope meme or—a possibility that others have raised—whether he'll be the next George McGovern. I won't even speculate as to what drama a Clinton nomination would bring, except to say we know there will be some. So while I'm enjoying the sparring that's exposing the flaws of the Democratic candidates, I'm not getting fitted for my dress to the inaugural ball. (Red of course!)

Overtime

I hear you, Hanna and Emily et al.—OK, pretty much everybody, now—and no doubt you're right, but I have to confess that I don't feel entirely ready for this to be over. I like this contest. I like the analysis and entrail-reading. I like getting up in the morning to find out how the returns came in overnight. I like watching as the Democratic party tries to manage the Godzilla-versus-Mothra nature of this battle between two formidable candidates and as superdelegates and party people try to decide which side to side with. It's suspenseful and exciting—like a great basketball game that's now gone into overtime. It doesn't seem such a bad thing if these two candidates continue to differentiate their positions and levels of readiness; and if Obama starts getting tougher media questioning and being obliged to respond, surely that will enable all of us to get to know him better. And I think that the primary results do enable us to look for illuminating patterns among voters. 

Ruth Marcus has a terrific column today in the Post. She convincingly refutes Hillary Clinton's complaints about sexism: Given that Clinton began this race as the establishment favorite, Marcus point out, it's ludicrous for her to plead that the playing field, for her, isn't level. However, Marcus also points out that for future female presidential candidates, sexism, while it may not be the most constraining "-ism" in America, cannot be dismissed. Noting that Hillary Clinton doesn't do as well among Democratic men as she does among women, and that there have been sexist overtones to some criticisms directed at her—the b-word among them—Marcus says, "I've been wondering whether the country, particularly the male half, can comfortably fit a woman into its mental picture of a president. Obama's success stems in large part from his ability to use rhetoric to inspire and persuade. The country has scant experience of a woman in that role." She quotes Ruth Mandel, director of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, pointing out that Americans lack "historical memory" of a charismatic leader who is a woman. Would we accept one, I wonder? Would voters flock to a woman with Obama-like charisma? If not, why not? Hillary Clinton isn't the candidate to answer these questions; there are too many variables, too many other reasons why someone might oppose her, besides gender. But I think these are interesting conversations to have and I'm prepared to keep having them for a while longer. It beats working.

Can the Superdelegates Save Us?

Way to Go, El Rushbo!

How To Close the Deal?

I'm also ready to close the deal already, one way or the other. That sentiment doesn't exactly seem to be sweeping the nation, though, at least not when each state gets its turn to vote. And those women: Wow, are they coming out in droves—59 percent of the vote in Ohio; 57 percent in Texas, Vermont, and Rhode Island. If the men were that jazzed, Obama would probably have won by now. Since he hasn't, the superdelegates seem to me to be in an awkward position. If they break for Obama, they're cutting off the process the party designed before it plays out and right after Hillary proved her staying power. If they don't, then the party continues a long march toward a stalemate. What do you do when one person is winning and the other one can't catch up but the race is long and the guy in the lead is only a stride or two ahead? It's an oddly dissatisfying variation on the tortoise and the hare.

Just End It

My only thought this morning is that I really want it to be over. I'll vow to raise $5 million for Hillary if she'll drop out.

Second thought: I'm glad Cindy traded canary yellow for red—it looks better on her. Hillary boringly wore red, as I predicted.

Final thought: This is a result of Democratic neuroticism—don't want to be a member of any club that would have me. When one rises high, they just see his/her flaws, and vice versa. It's like the girl who can't close the deal and get married. Republicans, though originally faced with worse, more flawed choices, just know how to make a decision. They are the Deciders. We are the Ditherers.

Read the rest of the conversation.