http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/opinion/27kristof.html?em&ex=1206763200&en=94030619646631f5&ei=5087Obama, Clinton — and Echoes of Nader?
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: March 27, 2008
snip//
“It’s amazing how bitter it’s getting, and it can only get worse in the months ahead,” said Gov. Philip Bredesen, a Democrat of Tennessee, who has not taken sides. “I’d love to have a Democratic president, but I’d also love to have a Democratic Congress. If you’ve got people mad and staying home, that can’t possibly help candidates running for the Senate, candidates running for House seats, and for the State Legislature.”
Mr. Bredesen is urging superdelegates (he’s one) to hold a primary in June, so that a winner would be chosen in time to begin a healing process before the convention.
Instead, the battle is getting bloodier. Mrs. Clinton spoke this week about the contest continuing for “the next three months” — and those would surely be a toxic three months. There’s already grumbling that Mrs. Clinton’s real strategy is to destroy Mr. Obama’s chances of winning the general election so that she can compete in 2012.
Senator Clinton, who has done so much fine work on health and children’s issues for so many years and who more recently has been an outstanding senator, deserves better. Likewise, Mr. Clinton, who tackled AIDS and poverty so passionately since leaving the White House, risks tarnishing his own legacy. His poll approval ratings have dropped steadily, and he now has higher unfavorable ratings than favorable.
If Mrs. Clinton can run a high-minded, civil campaign and rein in her proxies, then she has every right to continue through the next few primaries, and the Democrats might even benefit from the bolstered attention and turnout.
But if the brawl continues, then she and her husband may be remembered by many people who long admired them as having the same effect on Mr. Obama this November that Ralph Nader had on Al Gore in 2000.
Do the Clintons really want to risk becoming the Naders of 2008?