Op-Ed by Joan Vennochi

Hillary’s women have a choice to make.

Do they stick with their party and the candidate who reminds them of every man who got the raise and promotion before they did? Or, do they switch to the Republican nominee who reminds them of the dad with whom they disagree, but respect?

If Barack Obama picks Hillary Clinton as his running mate, the choice is easy: Obama-Clinton in November. If he selects another Democrat, it could get more complicated.

Without Hillary on the ticket, can a Clinton supporter seamlessly transfer loyalty to Obama, who is likable enough, unless he slips and calls her “sweetie”?

Or, is “sweetie” automatically preferable to John McCain’s response to a female supporter who asked the Arizona senator back in November, “How do we beat the bitch?” As the room erupted in laughter, McCain replied: “That’s an excellent question.”

On Tuesday night, Obama and McCain lavished praise on Clinton, the loser with the power that comes with winning nearly 18 million votes over the long primary season. The two rivals covet Clinton’s constituency, so both gushed over the candidate who put it in play.

“As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach,” said McCain.

Obama said, “Senator Hillary Clinton has made history in this campaign not just because she’s a woman who has done what no woman has done before, but because she’s a leader who inspires millions of Americans with her strength, her courage, and her commitment to the causes that brought us here tonight.”

Their groveling means one thing: leverage. Clinton has it, and she’s using it to play political hardball, just like any man would do.

For once, her leverage has nothing to do with being Bill Clinton’s wife. As Clinton vies for the second spot on the Democratic ticket, her power is rooted in the campaign she waged on her own behalf, in the millions of men and women who chose Clinton over Obama and are now up for grabs.

If voting were purely scientific, Obama could expect many Clinton supporters to swiftly get behind him after contemplating his stand versus McCain’s on issues like Iraq, healthcare, abortion, taxes, and education. But voting isn’t completely rational, as proven by the outcome in 2004.

Read the full article on Boston.com

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 5th, 2008 at 9:55 am and is filed under Press. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.