What, Me Worry About The Democrats?

Despite having two strong, intelligent, history-making candidates, are the Democrats on a collision course that will leave the Republicans in control of the White House come November? That worst-case scenario (for Democrats, at least) is far more likely to play out the longer Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama keep hammering away at one another while Sen. John McCain waits to face the bruised and battered “winner.”

Clinton scored an impressive victory last night in Pennsylvania. Outspent 2-1 in ad dollars and written off by most political commentators not too long ago, her latest victory reinforces her case that she's a fighter who won't quit and the better candidate to beat the Republicans in big battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.

Indeed, perhaps the most disturbing exit poll from yesterday's primary revealed that only 38 percent of Clinton voters in Pennsylavnia would vote for Obama against McCain this fall. That could just be sour grapes in a highly emotional battle between the party's two rock stars, or it could portend a grim fate for Obama in November should he manage to secure the nomination.

Obama still leads–in both the popular vote (although his margin was cut by some 25 percent last night) and the more esoteric pledged delegate count. But here is where it gets weird.

It appears almost impossible for Clinton to overtake Obama in delegates allocated by the primaries in the races that remain. Overtaking him on the popular vote will be very difficult as well. Unless she somehow gets Florida and Michigan back in play, she'll have to go to Plan B–convince the so-called “superdelegates” she is the more viable, electable candidate against McCain.

Her argument is threefold. One is the fact that she's won most of the big states–including those with the kinds of swing voters (older, a little more conservative, and female)–needed to top the Republicans.

Second, she'll argue that she's a relentless campaigner who is tough enough to go toe-to-toe with the take-no-prisoners, Swift-boating Republicans.

Third, she'll continue to make the case that she's more experienced and better prepared to hit the ground running on Day One of her new administration.

When you consider the fact that their policies are pretty much alike (outside of their approach to health care reform, with Clinton insisting on mandatory universal coverage), Obama would have to rely on his call for a sea change in how politics is conducted (the biggest selling point for me and millions of others), his more inspirational style and the technical fact that he is ahead (but not by much) on primary delegates and popular votes to convince the party to give him the nod.

However, the damage that could be done in November if Clinton manages to convince the “philosopher kings” of the party to disregard the national primary results could alienate Obama supporters to such a degree that her victory would be pyrrhic–particularly if this battle goes all the way through to the convention. That would leave the winner barely two months to turn their focus on beating McCain, while providing the Republicans with more and more ammunition to use against the Democrats as the internal mud-slinging intensifies.

I have a bad feeling that should Obama have this nomination taken from him procedurally, in the modern equivalent of a backroom deal, rather than fair and square at the ballot box, millions of Obama's supporters, while not likely to vote for McCain out of spite, might just stay home on Election Day, effectively handing the White House back to the Republicans.

Of course, if Clinton loses both Indiana (a close race) and North Carolina in two weeks, the whole tenor of this discussion changes. Clinton would have a far more difficult case to make.

However, should she at least win in Indiana, the doubts about Obama will only be amplified, and Clinton could gain the momentum she desperately needs to take the nomination.

What do you folks think?