Party Chairman Howard Dean says he was "dumbfounded" at the suggestion by Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy Friday that Sen. Clinton should pull out.
"Having run for president myself, nobody tells you when to get in, and nobody tells you when to get out," Mr. Dean said. "That's about the most personal decision you can make after all the time and effort you put into it."
I think Dean may have given an unparsable statement in favor of Clinton staying in the race until she decides to leave it. But we'll see.
UPDATE: Melissa questioned whether I was taking a shot at anyone with the above sentences. I wasn't. I was trying to express my pleasure that for once, a statement has been issued that can't be taken wrong by anyone, on either side of the race for the nomination. Because right now, the level of trust on all sides is, let's face it, pretty low. And Dean's statement is welcome because he left no room for interpretation or questioning: Hillary, like he once did, is running for president, and it's up to her when or if she quits. Period. (Whether Dean finds a way to undermine this in the future...well, we'll see. I give it even odds.)
But I do want to say this: If Obama and/or Clinton and/or anyone else is getting their statements parsed right now, they have only themselves to blame. Months ago, both sides could have taken affirmative steps to keep sexism and racism out of this campaign. Neither side took the opportunity to do so, and now the level of trust between the warring camps is nil. And so when Hillary Clinton says Obama is not a Muslim as far as she knows, Obama supporters do not react by accepting what appears to be the plain meaning of those words; they focus on the end clause, and say that Clinton was insinuating Obama might be Muslim after all. When Obama says Clinton can stay in the race, and is a fierce opponent, it is assumed that he's subtly saying she's just being stubborn, and by the way, she's scary. Pat Leahy obviously was acting on his behalf, just like Geraldine Ferraro was working on Clinton's behalf. It's obvious, if you don't have trust.
Trust has to be earned, and once lost, it's hard to recover. Obama and Clinton have both been guilty of playing footsie with the worst elements in the Democratic party. We can debate all night who has been the worst actor, and we'll get lots of references to scorched earth and Donnie McClurkin and claws coming out and pictures in Somali garb. All that's beside the point; the point is that neither candidate has clean hands, and both have done a lot to make their opponent's supporters question their commitment to progressive ideals. Barack Obama himself has used sexist dog-whistles. Hillary Clinton herself has used xenophobic dog-whistles. And so why should a feminist feel trusting of Obama? Why should an African-American feel trusting of Clinton?
Both campaigns have only themselves to blame. And either candidate could choose, right now, to start rebuilding the dike, to start asserting that racism and sexism have no place in this campaign, especially in the Democratic party. Hillary Clinton could tell the Archie Bunker Democrats that she doesn't want their support if they're backing her for the color of her skin, and Barack Obama could tell them to stay home if they're backing him because he's male.
But I'm not holding my breath for either campaign to do that, and I wouldn't suggest you do, either. Both campaigns seem to be trying to walk the line, to accept bigoted support without exactly embracing it. And so both campaigns should be unsurprised when others fear they are bigoted themselves, because most of us know that the only thing to do with a bigot is to rebuke them. And when we see someone instead accepting them...well, it does make one wonder what else they're willing to accept.
