Stanley’s analysis below is correct – and dear old Nora Ephron’s sneer over at The Huffington Post about whether Pennsylvania’s embittered white men are more racist than they’re sexist or vice-versa gets things completely upside down. The embittered white men are just about the only demographic weighing these candidates on their merits. The significant proportion of women and blacks in the Democratic base for whom identity politics trumps all is what’s stopping either candidate from gaining the momentum that would have emerged in a contest between two squaresville dead European males. It’s the identity-uber-alles blocs that prevent the black guy from finishing off the feminist or vice-versa. As the Bee Gees so shrewdly observed:
Whether you’re a mother
Or whether you’re a brother
You’re Staying Alive…
As for the New York Times editorial, that’s pitiful for all the reasons Lisa said, and then some. This contest is the logical reductio of the identity-group fetishization that they’ve been peddling for years. They’re just feeling suckered because they plumped for the establishment diversity candidate and then found themselves out-diversified. But, if they think this is a low, mean, petty, unbecoming contest, wait an election cycle or two when the Democratic primary offers the gay guy versus the imam.
*As several classicists have pointed out ad nauseam, I should have gone with “Reductio ad Obamam”. My old Latin master would flog me (which you could do in those days).