According to a Gallup poll released yesterday, a sizable proportion of Democratic voters would vote for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in November if their preferred candidate were denied the Democratic nomination. While supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) profess to be ready to desert the party in greater numbers, with 28 percent saying that they would vote Republican if Clinton were not nominated, the 19 percent figure backing Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is also disturbingly large.
Coming on the heels of a rather nasty turn in the primary battle, these numbers should be very troubling to Democratic Party officials - in particular, to the famed superdelegates who will most likely select the nominee.
But before party officials start sweating through their sport coats, here is something to consider: How many Mitt Romney supporters (including Mitt Romney) swore up and down that they could never support McCain? And how many of those (including Mitt Romney) turned around and supported the senator from Arizona once it became clear that their boy had a fork in him? What about the supporters of John Edwards, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee or Rudy Giuliani? Eventually, they all came around.
In 2004, when Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) defeated Howard Dean, their styles could not have been more different. But the Dean supporters turned out in force for Kerry in November, leading to one of the highest voter turnouts in recent political history.
Supporters of whichever candidate does not win this year's Democratic nomination must do the same. If not, they will pave the way for McCain, whose positions clash with both Obama's and Clinton's, to win the nomination.
Naturally, there will be plenty of reasons to be angry when the dust settles at this year's Democratic convention. If Clinton wins the nomination, it will likely be through a subversion of the pledged delegates and popular vote, and you can be sure that Obama voters will cry foul. If Obama puts it away this summer, there will be Clinton voters who complain that the campaign amounted to a glorified beauty contest that hinged more on words than solutions.
But why now, of all times, should Democratic voters be up in arms over the controversy surrounding this primary season? Why now, when faced with a decision between two strong, capable candidates who politically appear so similar? The media has made this out to be a divisive contest between two polar opposites, but when one examines their policies, Clinton and Obama really couldn't be more in sync. To support either of the Democratic candidates now only to shift to McCain later reeks of immaturity and bitterness, and it is politically against everything for which the voters have intensely fought throughout the campaign.
This divisive nature of political campaigns is nothing new. In a democracy, every presidential candidate loses except one, and supporters of the fallen almost always complain that their candidate was treated unfairly in some way, and that he or she "should have won." As Winston Churchill once said, "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others."
Democracy is messy. We know this. But this coming November, the people of the United States will face a decision that will chart an irreversible course for this nation and the world. There will be issues of war and peace, economic well-being, health care, education and diplomacy. Feeling spiteful now is fine and perhaps even justified. But come Election Day, Democrats need to realize what is truly important.
