Group A: Repeating the Past our setting a new precedent...

Sometimes the past can foreshadow the future so it comes as no surprise that political analysts are already speculating about the possible damage that can be caused by internal party disputes. Many worry that the ongoing competition between democratic presidential candidates may hurt their party’s chances of winning the election come November. According to popular belief negative disputes between two candidates of the same political party often leave voters liking one candidate and hating the other, creating a dilemma at the polls. For if a voter favors one candidate and he/she is not chosen as the presidential nominee they tend to vote against their party by casting a ballot for the other side rather than the disliked candidate.
According to an article reported by Katherine Q. Seelye and Jane Bosman in The New York Times, past elections has developed a trend of costing parties the election if contenders representing the same side continue to exhaust their energies through negative confrontations with other candidates of their respective party. We can start with the election of 1980 which depicts the phenomenon of disunity within parties leading to a depletion of supporters and eventually losing the presidency- and continue from there.

“President Jimmy Cater and Senator Edward M. Kennedy had been sharp adversaries with a bad history, and in the 1980 presidential campaign they let it bleed into a bitter nomination fight. The Carter administration challenged Mr. Kennedy’s patriotism and refused to debate, while Mr. Kennedy dragged out their fight for nine months, all the way to the Democratic convention. A weakened Mr. Carter prevailed and won the nomination, but he went on to lose in November”
“Equally difficult was the fight in the election of 1964 on the Republican side. The relationship between Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller was so antagonistic that Mr. Rockefeller was booed off the convention stage. Lyndon B. Johnson went on to beat Mr. Goldwater in a landslide” (Bosman, Seelyee, Carrying Primary Scars Into the General Election) .


There are many issued broiling here, not only are we focused on the day to day interaction of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama but it must also be recognized that the Republicans are closely monitoring their opponents– maybe contemplating a similar strategy to the one that caused Blaine his candidacy in 1884- to develop future attacks on their opponents position. The Republicans are not asleep,” said Paul Kirk, who was chairman of the Democratic Party from 1985 to 1989 and was the political director for Mr. Kennedy in 1980. “They’ll use all that stuff for cannon fodder.”
Though it may still be too early to predict how the upcoming election will play out, I am sure the democrats are highly aware of previous mishaps and once interactions between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama do not escalate into a distasteful contest, the democrats should have no problems in turning out the vote in November; besides there is nothing wrong with a little healthy competition.



http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/us/politics/01fight.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/us/politics/01campaign.html