Clinton and Obama Reverse Roles

Clinton and Obama Reverse Roles

Usually, it is the plucky outsider, the determined dissenter, the underdog who did not quite make it, who has to swallow hard and tell cheering supporters that they will have to support the other guy.

In fact, one of the standard images from the American campaign trail is that of the candidate who tried to beat the establishment being forced by hard circumstance – and the demands of party loyalty – to pull the plug on a movement that, when all the votes were, couldn’t beat the bosses.

On Saturday, however, it was the establishment – or, to be more precise, the woman with the most prominent name and, at least at the start of the 2008 presidential race, the support of the party’s dominant players – who had to tell her backers to tell her supporters to vote for the underdog.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Usually, it is the plucky outsider, the determined dissenter, the underdog who did not quite make it, who has to swallow hard and tell cheering supporters that they will have to support the other guy.

In fact, one of the standard images from the American campaign trail is that of the candidate who tried to beat the establishment being forced by hard circumstance – and the demands of party loyalty – to pull the plug on a movement that, when all the votes were, couldn’t beat the bosses.

On Saturday, however, it was the establishment – or, to be more precise, the woman with the most prominent name and, at least at the start of the 2008 presidential race, the support of the party’s dominant players – who had to tell her backers to tell her supporters to vote for the underdog.

“I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me,” said New York Senator Hillary Clinton, who began the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination as the prohibitive frontrunner but ended it as a fiery populist railing against the unfairness of the nominating process, the cruelty of the media and her abandonment by so-called “super delegates” for a young senator from Illinois who wasn’t even sure he wanted to make the race.

Clinton told thousands of cheering supporters at the National Building Museum in Washington on Saturday afternoon that it was time to “take our energy, our passion and our strength and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama.”

Clinton was gracious, and clear about her support for Obama. When some supporters booed her announcement of support for the candidate they had worked so hard to beat, the former First Lady said it would “break my heart” if hurt feelings on the part of her supporters in any way undermined Obama’s fall campaign against John McCain.

“(The) Democratic Party is a family, and now it’s time to restore the ties that bind us together,” she said, quieting most of the boos.

Obama was equally gracious.

“Obviously, I am thrilled and honored to have Sen. Clinton’s support,” he said, in what after the long primary campaign is surely an understatement. “But more than that, I honor her today for the valiant and historic campaign she has run. She shattered barriers on behalf of my daughters and women everywhere, who now know that there are no limits to their dreams. And she inspired millions with her strength, courage and unyielding commitment to the cause of working Americans.”

Of course, it is easier to be gracious when you are the winner.

That’s the norm.

What is not the norm in American politics is the image of the commoner who challenged party royalty accepting his victory.

Though the focus, this day, is on Hillary Clinton — and rightfully so — the real drama, the real history, is in the fact that the roles have been reversed.

The candidate who was not supposedto have a chance is now going to be the Democratic nominee for president.

And his name is Barack Obama.

Can we count on you?

In the coming election, the fate of our democracy and fundamental civil rights are on the ballot. The conservative architects of Project 2025 are scheming to institutionalize Donald Trump’s authoritarian vision across all levels of government if he should win.

We’ve already seen events that fill us with both dread and cautious optimism—throughout it all, The Nation has been a bulwark against misinformation and an advocate for bold, principled perspectives. Our dedicated writers have sat down with Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders for interviews, unpacked the shallow right-wing populist appeals of J.D. Vance, and debated the pathway for a Democratic victory in November.

Stories like these and the one you just read are vital at this critical juncture in our country’s history. Now more than ever, we need clear-eyed and deeply reported independent journalism to make sense of the headlines and sort fact from fiction. Donate today and join our 160-year legacy of speaking truth to power and uplifting the voices of grassroots advocates.

Throughout 2024 and what is likely the defining election of our lifetimes, we need your support to continue publishing the insightful journalism you rely on.

Thank you,
The Editors of The Nation

Ad Policy
x