California's Early Primary Setup for Hillary..A Waste of 60 Million Bucks.
Over the last 40 years, I have agreed with much of what Los Angeles Times columnist, George Skelton, (reporter..etc) has said.
However, I have a major disagreement with his assessment that the early February primary, which gave Hillary Clinton a major victory, was important.
The first reason: It was a setup between the Speaker of the Assembly and Mrs. Clinton, at a cost of $60-90 million dollars for the taxpayers of the Golden State.
The speaker said, "I talked with Hillary and she liked the idea of an early primary.".....Oh please...it was a set up.
The campaign strategy at the time was to hold major primaries early and wipe out any Democratic Party competitors. It didn't work, even with her victory in California. So, the state got sucked into the Clinton machine at a high price for taxpayers.
When a major state, like California, holds an early primary, it doesn't give time for any "dark-horse" candidate, or insurgent political politician to gain momentum.
Barack Obama was at a distinct disadvantage in early February:
While Hillary Clinton had been on the front pages for 16 years, with high name recognition, Senator Obama had been known for less than a year, on the campaign stump.
When California held its "super-duper" primary, the former First Lady had a double digit lead over Obama in the national polls.
Now, after the nation's Democrats have gotten to know Barack Obama, over time, he has an almost double digit lead over Mrs. Clinton (the polls have been fluctuating a little, lately.)
Certain politicians, by their early endorsement of Hillary, over Obama, like Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, have hurt their chances for the 2010 Governor's contest, by taking sides, and upsetting a good portion of Obama supporters.
Just think if California had the last major primary in June...it would have been as significant as the 1968 and 1972 Democratic Primaries.
Thanks for reading:
Bob Kholos
Comments