Democrats: Hold your horses

The avalanche started a week ago. The pundits, all of us trying to outdo one another, declared the race for the Democratic nomination over; the New York Post headline proclaimed Hillary Rodham Clinton “Toast.” The math showed it over, they said, and everyone except hardcore Clinton partisans were quick to urge Sen. Clinton (N.Y.) to quit the race. Tim Russert even got out his several white boards filled with numbers, a la 2000.

Fortunately, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) did not buy in — nor should Democrats who care about winning in November. What, you say? Isn’t it better to end it now, finally, and get moving right away against Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)? Why go through three more weeks of a Democratic primary campaign? Why drag this out even more?

There are several reasons for taking a deep breath and making sure that we Democrats get it right. Don’t get me wrong, I have been a strong proponent of going after McCain, doing ads that point up his terrifying record on the economy, Iraq, Iran, the mortgage crisis, opposition to a new GI bill for veterans, on and on. And do I want a nominee soon to engage McCain and put forth a Democratic alternative to a third Bush term? You bet.

But here are several thoughts about letting the voters in the final six contests vote. First, and foremost, is party unity. The best way to ensure that we have a united group of Democrats is to make certain that no side believes it was denied due process. The Clinton supporters need to be comfortable that voters in these last key states have had their chance to make their voices heard. They must believe that the contest was not ended prematurely and that Hillary was not driven from the race before it was truly over. Given the number of Clinton (and Obama) supporters who say they might vote for McCain, 20 to 30 percent in some exit polls, we cannot afford to lose those key voters. The Obama supporters would be absolutely furious, and rightly so, if superdelegates were to overturn the popular vote, the delegate vote, and the record number of states won by Obama in a back-room deal.

If Obama were perceived to be denied the nomination that he won, the Democratic Party would suffer not only in November but for generations to come. In essence, the Democratic coalition would come apart.

So the best way to ensure that Democrats do not see defections is to have this large number of committed Clinton supporters convinced that the outcome was fair, that Obama won the contests that mattered, that she fought to the end and distinguished herself in the campaign.

Remember that this has been a long and hard fight, longer and more intense than any primary campaign in our history. Certainly, far more expensive. Certainly, more people voting, contributing, volunteering than ever before.

Give the Clinton supporters the benefit of the doubt now. It is critical, psychologically, for them to come out of this saddened but not angry; disappointed, but not calling for retribution; tired, but not exhausted for the fall campaign.

Finally, no campaign is fair. No campaign is balanced. No press coverage is ever “fair and balanced.” That is certainly the case on all sides this year. But Democrats need to move beyond that — as John Kennedy said, life is unfair. But, for Hillary Clinton and her supporters, the last thing they need is the sense that they’ve been railroaded out of the race by a press corps or a party that has gone over the edge.

That is why we Democrats need to step back, hold our horses and let the next contests in West Virginia, Kentucky, Oregon, South Dakota, Montana and Puerto Rico play out until June 3. If Hillary Clinton decides to end the campaign before June 3, that is her choice, but I for one would rather see this work its way through and have a truly unified and committed party to win in November than an extra week of a general election race with angry and dispirited supporters sitting on the sidelines.

We Democrats did that once in 1968. Hopefully, never again.

Fenn is head of Fenn Communications Group, a political and public affairs media firm, and a regular contributor to The Hill’s Pundits Blog.