I’m continually flabbergasted by the popularity of “The Confluence,” a site haunted by ex-Kos bloggers and Hillary supporters who long outlived their welcome. For one, the site seems to be fast approaching its inevitable end in disappointment, as more and more “shadow campaign” groups give up the ghost. Most of the posts lately, like the one linked above, are geared towards staging a “netroots” upset at the Democratic convention, to force a fast-fading Senator Hillary Clinton to the nomination. Once this goal fails in disappointment and anger, the site’s raison d’etre seems likely to vanish.
A more important question, though, is what if it doesn’t? When Hillary doesn’t receive the nomination, what if groups like this attempt to fight on, to the general election, sowing discontent and anger in a party that desperately needs unity? There’s every indication that “Confluence” bloggers will never be happy – they demand that the convention be “fair, open and transparent with an authentic nomination for Hillary and arguments for her, and yes, maybe even some disunity before the final vote,” or they’ll “walk.” But there are enough soft factors in that demand to guarantee that there’ll always be standing to object, and always reason for Hillary Democrats to “walk.” But why? After the inevitable failure, what’s the point?
Although Obama remains ahead in the polls, it’s not by a comfortable margin. A continuance of party disunity, after the Convention, risks a McCain Presidency, which is likely to be even less to the liking of Hillary Democrats than Obama. If Hillary stood for feminism, McCain stands for gutting women’s rights. If Hillary stood for a fighting chance for middle America, McCain stands for more of the past eight years. Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees.