Madam President: Hillary Clinton in 2008

“Thirty seconds, Senator!” shouted the young producer. He was bespectacled, with spiked blonde hair. Probably about twenty-five years old, just a few years out of college and full of hope and idealism. The whole convention hall was full of kids just like him. They cheered for every speaker, even though they probably couldn’t name half of them. This was the first election for many, the first real one anyway. They had registered to vote when P. Diddy told them to four years earlier. Most voted for the loser, but many had sided with their parents and supported the President. Some of those former Republicans, especially women, were in the hall today. They were the key to victory, more so than in any election before this. If they showed up and voted right they could put one of their own in the White House.

Hillary Clinton waited backstage. She wore a navy blue power suit. That had been the staple of her wardrobe for years, and it had come to define the image of “Hillary.” She was one of the few politicians in the country who was identifiable by her first name. Not even Reagan or Kennedy could lay claim to that. Then again, she was also one of the very few recognizable female politicians. Love her or hate her, people knew who Hillary was. And now, with the eyes of the nation fixed on Denver, Colorado, she waited to take one giant step towards the office she craved most of all: The Presidency of the United States.

The seeds of Hillary’s campaign were planted on November 2, 2004. That was the day that the Democrat’s hearts were broken when George W. Bush defeated John Kerry. Many couldn’t believe it. Bush, the man who had stolen the election four years earlier, had just been given a second term? How was that possible? But it happened. Yes, there were a few diehards who refused to accept that Republicans hadn’t fixed the vote in Ohio. But they were few and far between. Most Democrats just sank into a deep depression. How could it get any worse?

But there was one liberal leader who didn’t sulk in the shame of defeat. She had stayed on the sidelines that election, not sticking her neck out too far for the Democratic nominee. Unlike Ted Kennedy or her husband, this Senator’s legacy hadn’t been defined yet. She didn’t want to be dragged down with a losing ticket. Instead she would bide her time and wait. She was getting good at that. So many of her friends and advisers had told her to run that year. They said that she would be the frontrunner for the nomination and would clear the field of other candidates. They told her she was the only one who could beat Bush, who could bring America back from the precipice of a Republican majority. But one person, her most important adviser told her to wait. There was some irony in that. Sixteen years earlier, Bill Clinton had been a hotshot young Governor on the radar screens of many Democratic Party activists. They thought he was the best choice to reset the Republican Revolution and take back the White House. But just as his campaign was about to gear up he pulled out. It was because of his wife. Unlike so many around him, Hillary knew that 1988 wasn’t going to be a Democratic year. The economy was doing fine, and Iran-Contra wasn’t big enough to sink Vice-President Bush. So Bill waited, and his patience paid off four years later. Now he told Hillary to wait. 2004 wasn’t her year.

As Democrat’s around the country tried to regroup after a terrible election, Hillary Clinton began to gear up for the next one. 2008 promised to be a wide open election. The Republicans would lack the power of incumbency, as Vice-President Dick Cheney had always made it clear that he had no interest in sitting in the Oval Office. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, the only other Cabinet member with any serious electoral appeal, was also sitting out despite the wishes of former Clinton pollster Dick Morris. The Republican field was likely to be as divided as ever. Meanwhile, Clinton was already the likely frontrunner for the nomination four years before the votes were cast. She would certainly face her fair share of opposition, especially from those who had never been close to the Clinton’s. But Hillary was the frontrunner, and she knew it.

In the meantime, Clinton devoted her efforts to dueling the Bush Administration over Iraq, Social Security, and nominees to the High Court. Hillary crafted a strong voting record. She was reliably liberal on issues important to the Democratic base. Solidly pro-choice, pro-labor, and pro-entitlements, Hillary was unlikely to receive any serious challenges from the Party’s main special interest groups. She also spoke out in opposition to the growing federal budget deficit, and joined former rival Newt Gingrich in calling for greater innovation and cost-saving measures in the health care field. She joined many conservatives in a weekly prayer breakfast, and called for tougher ratings for violent video games. It was a meticulously planned strategy of triangulation. Clinton’s goal was to comfortably position herself as a favorite of the Democratic establishment, while still appealing to the crucial swing voters who had broken for Bush in 2000 and 2004.

But there was one issue that remained a thorn in the side the Senator from New York. In the fall of 2002, Clinton joined many other Democrats in supporting a resolution allowing the President to invade Iraq. George Bush had heavily lobbied Congress for authorization, making the case that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons and that somebody had to stop him. When the United Nations refused to intervene, Bush claimed that it was up to America to do the world’s dirty work. The American people agreed with him, and it became a political liability to oppose the war. Many Democrats were unwilling to risk their political futures on legislation that was already going to pass, and supported the President. There was certainly an element of political pragmatism that went into Hillary’s vote to go to war. But she was also following her conscience. Her husband had paved an interventionist course in the 1990s, bombing Serbia into peace talks to end their ethnic cleansing policies. Now it was time to force Saddam Hussein out of Iraq, and the only way to do that was through a full-on invasion.

But Hillary’s vote for the war was now proving to be a liability. As casualties mounted and the months of occupation turned into years, the American people grew sick of war. The Iraqi Government failed to effectively govern their nation, as the de-Baathification and disbanding of the military had whipped out the nation’s political infrastructure. A violent insurgency proved to be far more lethal than the organized Iraqi military and many American’s saw another Vietnam on the horizon. By 2006, all but a few Democrats had abandoned the President, and even several Republicans began to call for a timetable for withdrawal. Hillary was caught in a terribly awkward position. Reject the war that she had supported four years earlier? Or stand firm, much like the Iron Lady of Great Britain (Margaret Thatcher) so often had? In this case, politics trumped principles. Clinton joined the growing bandwagon of supporters of withdrawal and hounded the President over the war. Still, anti-war liberals saw her as a late comer to the cause. Her late apology about supporting the war hurt her, and many on the left would never forgive her.

Being on the wrong side of Iraq did little to affect Clinton’s standing in the polls. She was the clear frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, and had built a solid lead in fundraising and potential endorsements. Despite high unfavorable ratings, Hillary was the mealticket whom many Democrats attached their hopes of victory to. 2008 would be her year, and she was prepared to go all the way. On January 20, 2007, she officially jumped into the race. She was “in. And I'm in to win."

You have my attention. Subscribed.

YES! I think we're the resident Hillary fanatics

Hilldog woop woop

Another debate. Another hour to talk about the minute differences between a half-dozen candidates who all pretty much believed the same things. Another hour of making the case that you, not anyone else, should represent the grand Democratic Party in November. It was understandable that the debates had becomes something of a running joke. Eighteen were scheduled before the first people even went to the polls. They began in April of 2007, a full year before many states held their primaries. Their appeal had worn off quickly.

Senator Hillary Clinton was used to debating. She had been doing it her entire life; with her friends, colleagues, rivals, and of course, Bill. This wasn’t her first rodeo, and she knew how the game was played. Be clear, succinct, and stay on point. Don’t let the moderator take you off message. Whatever you do, don’t say something stupid. A lot more potential voters watched the evening news than the debates, and a gaffe was a fast way to become the butt of a Jon Stewart gag.

It was no surprise that Hillary had been crowned the winner of the early debates. She was battle tested and knew what she was doing. The same couldn’t be said for her opponents. John Edwards stumbled over questions about his personal wealth and failed to bring back the focus to his anti-poverty message. Former Clinton Cabinet member Bill Richardson was uninspiring and boring. Joe Biden was his usual gregarious self, while the more liberal candidates (Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel) all failed to tie their ideology to a clear narrative. Barack Obama, the young and idealistic Senator from Illinois, was much more comfortable in front of a crowd than he was going toe to toe with his rivals. But he was getting better. Hillary knew that, and she knew that his personal appeal was a threat. That’s why she emphasized her experience and knowledge of the issues. She might not be the most charismatic or the youngest, but she knew what she was talking about and could more than hold her own against the Republican nominee in the fall.

Throughout 2007, the Clinton campaign had remained the gold standard by which all others were measured. They were professional, efficient, and smart. There was rarely an embarrassing leak or misjudged decision. Many of the campaign’s highest ranking members were veterans of “Hillaryland,” the Senator’s most reliable staffers. They included Evelyn Lieberman, Ann Lewis, Cheryl Mills, and most prominently, Patti Solis Doyle. As campaign manager, Doyle had effectively presented Hillary as the safe, consensus choice for the nomination. The candidate’s experience and knowledge of the issues were emphasized, while attacks on her rivals were minimized. But there were emerging cracks in the seemingly steadfast façade. An enthusiasm gap was beginning to grow between Senator Clinton and her two chief opponents, John Edwards and Barack Obama. Both candidates appeared youthful and energetic, inspiring their supporters. Meanwhile, Hillary inspired few. She was safe, but she was not exciting.

Clinton’s biggest advantage, her debating prowess, had actually been minimized by the sheer number of televised debates. As viewers grew bored and tired with the seemingly endless cascade of platitudes and arguments, they began to tune out. Instead of several debates that were few and far between, there seemed to be a contest once every two or three weeks. That meant each individual debate became less and less important. By December of 2007, it became painfully obvious that the national attention was more focused on the candidates and less on the debates. For Clinton, that was a problem. Obama and Edwards had proven their ability to draw supporters, and Clinton’s firewall of support among the establishment was beginning to teeter. While most of the major unions had abstained from endorsing anyone, many of the local branches in Iowa and New Hampshire had come out for Edwards. Meanwhile, African-American leaders no longer saw Senator Obama as a long-shot candidate. He was also proving to be an incredible fundraiser, pulling in millions of dollars a week. Polls also showed a tightening, especially in Iowa.

The Clinton campaign was faced with a difficult choice. Mike Henry, a top adviser to the campaign and veteran Democratic Party strategist, had long advocating pulling out of Iowa and focusing the campaign’s resources in other states. Henry had gone so far as to submit a memo in the summer of 2007 stating that by ignoring the Hawkeye State the caucuses would be made largely irrelevant. After all, if the national frontrunner ignored Iowa, the victor would gain little momentum. Then again, what would that say about Clinton if she retreated from the first contest? Initially the advice had been discarded as defeatist. But as the temperature dropped and the caucuses drew ever closer, many in the Clinton camp began to reconsider Henry’s advice. One adviser in particular agreed that Iowa would become irrelevant if Clinton shifted her resources to New Hampshire. That man had some experience in the matter, as he had largely ignored Iowa sixteen years earlier.

At a meeting held just before Christmas, the Clinton staff debated the campaign’s future plans in Iowa. Henry once again advocated pulling out of Iowa, while most of “Hillaryland” supported staying the course. Finally, “the boss” spoke up. Bill Clinton cleared his throat and made the case for a seismic shift in campaign strategy as only he could. In 1992 he had conceded Iowa to its Senator, Tom Harkin, and moved on to New Hampshire. His strong finish in the nation’s first primary had lead to the moniker “the comeback kid” and catapulted Clinton to frontrunner status. The former President argued that Edwards was essentially a favorite son in Iowa, as he had lived in the state for the last year. By leaving Iowa to him and Obama, Clinton argued that Hillary could rise above the two and win a landslide in New Hampshire. The Senator was reluctant. Giving up in Iowa would be seen as a defeat, and she and her staff would need to devote a good amount of time to spin it into something positive. But she saw the benefits of focusing on New Hampshire, and understood that Iowa was her weakest early state. Finally, after much debate and deliberation, she agreed to pull all ads and stop campaigning there after the holiday season.

Through the end of December and early January, Clinton shifted considerable resources away from Iowa and relocated them to New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada. The campaign dispatched Bill to Iowa to make the case that his wife was still the best candidate in the race, and that she was not ignoring them. Meanwhile, Edwards and Obama hammered away at each other in an attempt to win over Clinton supporters. Edwards’ populist message appealed to the same voters who had supported Dick Gephardt and Tom Harkin in the past, while Obama targeted college students, young people, and opponents of the Iraq War. Clinton surrogate Tom Vilsack (also the state’s governor) made a hard sell for Hillary, arguing that she was the only candidate who could unite the Democratic Party and win in November. When Iowans finally made the trek to their caucus sites, it was anybody’s game. Both the Edwards and Obama campaigns had taken a page from Jimmy Carter and put a great deal of time into understanding how the caucuses worked. They identified supporters in each precinct, and selected the most devoted to head up their efforts. The media swarmed the state, and tried their best to make heads or tails of an incredible close race. Finally, when the night was over, the result was clear: John Edwards, the man who became a household name after a surprise second-place finish in the caucuses four years earlier, had won by a nose. Campaigning at a diner in Concord, New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton breathed a sigh of relief.

John Edwards: 37%
Barack Obama: 36%
Hillary Clinton: 21%
Bill Richardson: 4%
Joe Biden: 2%

A rocky start, but she'll get it no doubt.

Great update, very thorough and very easy-to-read. I loved it! Smart move by Hillary, in my book. Is it possible you'll include GOP Winners so we can see if the GE will change at all? (though I know the focus is on Hillary).

Great start hc!

I am very interested to see how she recovers from Iowa.

Let me know if you'd like me to do reposts from Election Atlas forums to save you some time hcallega. Think Holbrooke should be Secretary of State ITTL. I read a recent article from Slate, which states he would probably be Secretary of State if Hillary Clinton won.

THE OBSERVER said:

Let me know if you'd like me to do reposts from Election Atlas forums to save you some time hcallega. Think Holbrooke should be Secretary of State ITTL. I read a recent article from Slate, which states he would probably be Secretary of State if Hillary Clinton won.

Click to expand...

No need to do the reposts. I have plenty of free time this summer. Can you link me that article?

This looks interesting. Hillary can recover if she wins New Hampshire.

hcallega said:

No need to do the reposts. I have plenty of free time this summer. Can you link me that article?

Click to expand...

I believe this is the article

hcallega said:

No need to do the reposts. I have plenty of free time this summer. Can you link me that article?

Click to expand...

Here it is: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/06/james_mann_s_the_obamians_excerpt_richard_holbrooke_barack_obama_and_hillary_clinton.html

Let me know if ur still interested in doing that RFK TL, or another late 20th Century-early 21st Century Alternate History TL. Think one about McCain would work well?

With Celine Dion’s “You and I” playing over the loud speakers, Hillary Clinton bounded onto the stage. The crowd greeted her with a roaring ovation and chants of “Hill-a-ry! Hill-a-ry! Hill-a-ry!” The victorious Senator shook the hands of the supporters lucky enough to get within arms-reach of the stage. An ear-to-ear smile covered her face. Finally, Clinton was handed a microphone and walked to the center of the stage. Flanked by former Governor and current Senate candidate Jeanne Shaheen and Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter, Clinton triumphantly proclaimed victory. “Less than a week ago, the media and my opponents said this campaign was dead in the water. But you never gave up. You didn’t quit on me and this campaign. And guess what? Because of your hard work, your sweat, your efforts, we did it! Now let’s finish what we started.”


Clinton was right in her analysis of the media’s reaction to her distant third place finish in Iowa. Pundits on both sides of the aisle claimed that Hillary had been dealt a “deafening defeat” and that “her campaign is on the ropes.” Little notice was paid to Clinton’s still large lead in New Hampshire. Many liberal outlets began to proclaim Edwards the new frontrunner, despite his razor-thin margin of victory. Others called on progressives to throw their weight behind Obama. After all, if he could do so well in a predominately white and rural state, imagine what he could do in a New York or California? The Clinton campaign responded by sticking to the same old line: Iowa was just one contest, and they were prepared to go all the way.



When Edwards and Obama arrived in New Hampshire, they found a state that might as well have been named “Hillaryland.” The Clinton campaign dominated the airwaves with advertisements proclaiming their candidate’s experience and knowledge of the issues. Mike Henry advised that the ads remain positive. There was no need to go negative, lest the campaign elevate one of their opponents to an even level with Hillary. The Senator had been spending a great deal of time in the state. She had racked up the endorsements of many local leaders and party officials, as well as Shaheen and Shea-Porter. Meanwhile, the Edwards campaign lacked any strong infrastructure in the state and relied upon momentum from Iowa to gain support. Obama was in a stronger position. He had received the endorsement of Congressman Paul Hodes and Governor John Lynch, and was a favorite among college students and more centrist Democrats. Polls showed that it was the Illinois Senator and not Edwards who had gained the most since Iowa. He trailed Clinton by less than ten points, and his frantic campaigning was beginning to make a mark. But time was not on his side. Clinton’s large lead in endorsements, organization, and time in the state proved too much for either of her main opponents to overcome. Hillary would win by a comfortable margin of 9 points, stripping the momentum that Obama and Edwards had picked up in Iowa. It was a decisive victory, and one which assured that Senator Clinton would remain the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination.


The Republican contest proved much less decisive. In Iowa, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee had narrowly defeated Mitt Romney, the pre-election favorite. Huckabee had won over the support of the Evangelical and Christian conservative community, and had dealt Romney a serious blow. But Romney had come back, winning Wyoming and New Hampshire. The Granite State had proved to be a tough contest, as Romney dueled with Senator John McCain for support. McCain was popular among veterans, defense hawks, and fiscal conservatives, while Romney maintained support among rank-and-file conservatives, as well as many moderates. McCain’s personal popularity and history in the state (he defeated George Bush there in 2000) helped him fight against Romney’s massive monetary lead, but it was not enough. Romney’s victory, much like Clinton’s, put him back in the driver’s seat for his party’s nomination.


The results of the New Hampshire primaries left both parties divided. The frontrunners had prevailed, but there were still clear challengers to their nominations. Romney’s support was soft, especially among the Christian Right. Clinton had proved popular, but she still had major problems wooing over key elements of the Democratic Party’s left wing. Both candidates would need to overcome these weaknesses if they had any hope of presenting a united front in the general election. For Clinton, the key was to maintain here support among her base (women, working class voters, and fans of her husband) while wooing African-Americans, doves, and liberal critics of the past Clinton Administration. That would be challenging, but not impossible. To win the support of African-Americans, Hillary dispatched her husband. The former President emphasized his wife’s record on racial issues and pointed out that “tangible results are much more important than symbolism.” Clinton also turned the foreign policy issue against her opponents, claiming that “it’s easy for Senator Obama to claim that he was against the Iraq War from the start. He didn’t have to vote on the resolution, and he didn’t have any stake in the game.” Finally, she came out against the North American Free Trade Agreement, despite her husband’s major role in achieving ratification of the deal. Clinton’s “reverse triangulation” proved largely successful. She pulled off victories in Michigan (running against “uncommitted”) and in Nevada, once again defeating a divided opposition. The focus of the race then shifted to South Carolina, where Obama had campaigned heavily with the aid of Oprah Winfrey. Once again Clinton deployed her husband to the state, and focused on her strong record in attacking Obama. The results were close, but the presence of John Edwards on the left siphoned votes from the Illinois Senator. Clinton won narrowly by three percent, but Obama had once again proven his ability to draw voters.



Meanwhile, Mitt Romney faced a much more difficult predicament. In an attempt to win over social conservatives, Romney had publically come out against Roe vs. Wade and gay marriage. But he was still Mormon, a fact that rubbed many Evangelicals and Catholics the wrong way. He also had a well documented past as a social liberal. This had not been a problem when his main opponents were Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, but when facing a former Baptist minister, having a pro-choice history was a problem. Romney had bested McCain in Michigan and Nevada, but was forced to go toe-to-toe with Huckabee in Iowa. The bass-playing preacher called on voters to support his “values based, grassroots effort to change American politics for the better.” Romney chose to go on the offensive. He attacked Huckabee for “the sort of tax-and-spend policies I’d expect from Hillary Clinton, not a so-called Reagan Republican.” But his attacks fell on deaf ears. McCain emphasized defense issues in the veteran-heavy state and attacked both Romney and Huckabee for lacking a consistently conservative record. The final results were the worst-case scenario for Romney. Huckabee won by seven points over Huckabee, with former Senator Fred Thompson finishing in a close third. Romney finished in fourth place. He won just over 10 percent of the vote.



The results in South Carolina provided polar opposite reactions from the two parties. After some early doubts, Hillary Clinton had maintained her position as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. She began to pile up more and more endorsements and funds as her campaign planned to deliver a knockout punch in the Super Tuesday primaries. On the other hand, the Romney campaign desperately attempted to regroup after being routed by Huckabee. His campaign moved to Florida, a Southern state he was much stronger in. Using his sizeable financial edge, he managed to squeak out a victory over John McCain and company. Rudy Giuliani, who had hedged his campaign’s bets on the Sunshine State was knocked out, finishing in a distant third place. Moving on to Maine, Romney won decisively. But the underlying message of South Carolina was still clear: Romney was not the candidate the South wanted. To win the Republican nomination, and the Presidency, he would have to change their minds.uiH

Hillary will probably win by 54% or so, but might have less coattails than Obama. The larger win will probably mean things are about the same nationally, but with a different balance between the regions. I wouldn't want to be Saxby Chambliss or Mitch McConnell.

I don't think Hillary will have the personal popularity Obama has, either. Her disapproval ratings are probably going to shoot up way faster than his, and Romney is probably smiling around this time ITTL.

She's gonna make it.

historybuff said:

She's gonna make it.

Click to expand...

Romney of all people might make it too.

Like this; I'm guessing Mark Penn doesn't take over the campaign TTL?

John Fredrick Parker said:

Like this; I'm guessing Mark Penn doesn't take over the campaign TTL?

Click to expand...

Sort of. The inner-workings of the campaign are fairly similar to OTL, only Bill comes down in support of avoiding New Hampshire.

The difference between the way Obama and Hillary run thier campaigns could be interesting.

Super Tuesday. Those two words, largely a media creation, meant so much. They symbolized the single most important day of voting in the Presidential primaries. Created in 1988, Super Tuesday was designed to shorten the primary calendar and allow the frontrunner to quickly eliminate his or her rivals and consolidate support within the party. This plan had worked in 1992 and 2004 for the Democrats, and in 1988, 1996, and 2000 for the Republicans. Both parties hoped that 2008 would clear the field and allow their respective nominee to focus on what was sure to be a close general election. Whether or not that actually happened would prove to be more difficult.


On the Democratic side, Senator Hillary Clinton of New York had established herself as a strong frontrunner after victories in the primaries and caucuses leading up to Super Tuesday. She had only been defeated in Iowa and was quickly racking up support from crucial party leaders and interest groups. On February 4th, the Monday before the big day, Clinton received the endorsements of both of Massachusetts’ Senators; Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. A week earlier she received the public support of former Vice-President Al Gore on 60 Minutes. Clinton’s opponents, John Edwards and Barack Obama, were on the ropes. Edwards’ victory in Iowa had provided little momentum as he was promptly defeated by a wide margin in the following New Hampshire primary. It was Obama that had emerged as Clinton’s greatest threat for the nomination. His charisma, support among young people and African-Americans, and prolific fundraising ability made Obama a threat on Hillary’s left flank. Super Tuesday would prove to be an opportunity for Clinton to force the freshman Senator out of the race and look to consolidate support within her party.



The situation for the Republicans was far more chaotic. The race for the GOP nomination had become a three-way fight. In the run-up to Super Tuesday, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had emerged as the tenuous frontrunner. He had won six out of the first eight contests, and was well positioned financially. But Romney was not out of the woods yet. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee had fashioned a strong campaign based around social conservatism. His warm attitude and positive disposition presented a strong contrast to Romney’s almost robotic delivery. Huckabee had stunned insiders and pundits by narrowly defeating Romney in the Iowa Caucuses, and had won a commanding victory in the South Carolina primary several weeks later. He hoped to solidify his support among Evangelicals and southerners on Super Tuesday. Huckabee was joined in his attacks on Romney by Arizona Senator John McCain. A foreign policy specialist, McCain had focused his campaign on the War on Terror and deficit reduction. He painted Romney as a RINO (Republican in Name Only) who had provided little evidence in support of his conservative views. McCain had failed to win any primaries or caucuses and was campaigning on a shoestring budget. He hoped that Super Tuesday would be the breakthrough that he needed to keep his campaign alive.



Both frontrunners hoped that Super Tuesday would act as a knockout blow to their opponents. But only would see their wish come true. With strong institutional support behind her, Hillary Clinton won a decisive victory. She defeated Obama and Edwards in all but two contests. Clinton narrowly defeated Obama in the crucial state of California, while also prevailing in many southern states that the polls had shown were quite close. The only states that she lost were Illinois and Kansas, two states that Obama could call home. Edwards finished in third place in most of the contests, only really competing in Tennessee and Oklahoma. His campaign was done for. Several days later he offered his endorsement to Senator Clinton stating “A year ago I set out to show that our nation had become two very different Americas. While I have not succeeded in winning the nomination of the Democratic Party, I believe that I have made millions of Americans aware of how the other half lives. I believe that Senator Clinton will carry on that cause, and I offer my strong support to her in the upcoming campaign.”


Senator Obama was also dealt a heavy blow on Super Tuesday. His victories in Illinois and Kansas had been decisive, but he lacked the nationwide support to carry on his campaign. Nonetheless, Obama was not eager to go home just yet. He had raised millions of dollars and had tapped into a new generation of voters. Why should he give up now? Nonetheless, his advisers urged him not to prolong the race and make enemies out of crucial Democratic Party leaders. He would need their support if he was going to make a run in the future and could not afford to turn them against him. Reluctantly, Obama agreed to drop out and endorse Clinton. Instead of campaigning with her, Obama simply stated that he was suspending his campaign and would support Senator Clinton in November. He did so in an interview with one of his top supporters, Oprah Winfrey. Privately, Obama sought to take a break from politics and reassess his future. He would go on to campaign with Clinton in the summer and fall, but in the meantime would largely maintain a low profile in the Senate.


The Republican primaries provided far less clarity. Romney’s weaknesses among social conservatives and Southerners was painfully clear, as Huckabee swept Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Romney was able to pick up big wins in all the other contests besides Arizona (where McCain won easily and without contest), but was unable to clinch the nomination. McCain dropped out soon after, but failed to endorse Romney. Instead he simply stated that “I’ll support the Republican Nominee for President, whoever that may be.” The implicit undertone was that there was no guarantee Romney would actually win. The bigger boost for Romney’s campaign was that many conservative power-brokers saw Huckabee as a serious threat to the long term health of the Republican Party. Many began to endorse Romney simply to avoid the possibility of Huckabee on the top of the ticket. In turn, Romney began to shift right in an attempt to close the gap between himself as the former Baptist preacher.



As Hillary Clinton consolidated her support within the Democratic Party, Romney and Huckabee went to war. Now that the race was one-on-one, both candidates had the freedom to directly target the other. Huckabee blasted Romney for being a “Johnny-come-lately conservative” who “has flipped-flopped on some of the most important issues in this election.” Romney fired back by calling Huckabee a “tax-and-spender who sees the budget deficit and says ‘more please.’” The fierce war or words between the two campaigns deeply concerned many Republican leaders who believed that the drawn out contest was providing Democrats with ammunition for the November election. The first primaries after Super Tuesday would do little to assuage them. While Romney decisively won the Washington caucuses, he would be equally defeated in Kansas and Louisiana by Huckabee. Several days later, Romney would bounce back by sweeping the “Potomac Primaries” in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia. The win in the Commonwealth was particularly meaningful, as it was Romney’s first victory in Dixie since the Florida primary. Romney would continue to gain momentum with wins in Wisconsin and in the American territories abroad. The March 4th primaries in Ohio and Texas would prove crucial to deciding who would be the Republican nominee.



The Huckabee campaign’s goal was to keep the final results close in the two delegate-heavy races. They had done so in Wisconsin and Virginia, but had been blown out otherwise. Their campaign had developed a regional dynamic and was too bound to the support of Evangelicals. Fiscal conservatives, war-hawks, and businessmen and women had yet to support his cause and had largely rallied to Romney. He was the safe choice and the better option in the general election. Yet Huckabee believed that he could take the race down to the wire if he avoided a blow-out loss in both primaries. He was confident he could win the upcoming races in Mississippi and Pennsylvania, yet his cause would appear hopeless if Romney walloped him in Ohio and Texas. Therefore Huckabee began an aggressive barnstorming campaign through both states. Meanwhile, Romney began to campaign as a frontrunner. He surrounded himself with prominent Republican officeholders and reiterated his support for traditional conservative views on the economy, taxes, and the deficit. By emphasizing these issues, he was able to avoid dealing with abortion, gay marriage, and other areas of weakness. Combined with an ad-blitz in these states, Romney was able to push Huckabee to the brink. The final results proved him right. Romney won a commanding victory in Ohio, while winning by eight points in Texas. These victories sealed it. It would be Mitt Romney vs. Hillary Clinton in November.