They could not believe the words she said knowing that Barrack Obama had finally collected enough delegates votes for the nomination. She said, "I will be making no decisions tonight." Some were even furious at her.
A couple of weeks ago, people wondered when she would leave. The logic of the political process suggested that it would happen at any time. The same logic prompted that Hillary would concede last night. And this same logic motivated her closest campaign advisors to start a leak that it would happen today.
And people believed them, at any rate those who are well versed in the intricacies of campaign politics. But those who came to Baruch College in New York City on Tuesday evening disagreed. They came to see Hillary Clinton's final show, but it was not the last because everything is not over for her. It was simply the end of primaries, from which she emerged not entirely defeated.
She has destroyed the logic of the political process, and the brains of the most sophisticated and knowledgeable. Looking at the Americans from afar, it is easy to see that their way of life is excellent, and their socio-political system functions flawlessly. But any minor mishap puts them into a stupor. They do not understand what to do outside the well-adjusted system and usual course of events.
The well-educated and incredibly successful John Edwards left the race at the right moment. Any decent gentleman who dared fight for the presidency would do the same. The heroic and extremely popular Rudy Giuliani, nicknamed the Mayor of all America for his bold and responsible decisions during 9/11, also acted in line with the decencies of political games - he quit. There were many other candidates this election season who acted decently and wisely, but whose names we are unable to recall.
Hillary Clinton seems stubborn, and many can reproach her for a lack of concern for party interests. It is high time the party rallied around the new Black leader, but she won't leave!
She will be criticized by party leaders, and liberal newspaper and TV commentators, most of whom have long sympathized with Obama. During almost all the primaries, the American media quoted the figure 2,025. This was the number of delegates needed at the Democratic convention to clinch the nomination. This figure was different than usual because Florida and Michigan were penalized for holding the primaries early. Their legislatures with a Republican majority violated Democratic rules. When Hillary Clinton, who won in both states, started talking about the need to consider the opinion of their residents, the media turned a deaf ear, and stubbornly mentioned the figure which favored Obama. It was presented as the only correct one. Indeed, how can the leader err? They sentenced Clinton to defeat in advance, and were wondering why she was still flapping about.
On May 31, the Democratic leaders decided to consider the voice of Michigan and Florida residents, but their delegates only get half a vote. The required figure then changed to 2,118. Many could not understand this change because it was an obstacle for the frontrunner on the road to victory.
But how could she think about these reproaches when her speech yesterday was accompanied by loud chants of Denver, the city that will host the Democratic convention in August.
These reproaches pale in insignificance when compared with the 18 million votes she received during the primaries - this is more than any runner-up has ever received.
The inter-party situation with the two punished states is similar to the Florida vote recount in 2000, which awarded the presidency to a candidate who did not win the popular vote (the Electoral College makes this possible). Hillary Clinton is ahead in the popular votes, but behind in the number of delegates. But since the delegate system is considered more correct and logical in the political process, the opinion of two or three million people can simply be ignored.
At first, Obama did not quite fit in the system, mainly because of his appearance and his extreme revolutionary demand for change. But he adjusted to the system, and the system accepted him when he started scoring one victory after another in the primaries.
In general, change is well within the swing of the American political pendulum - the long Republican rule should give way to a young Democrat, who is eager to increase taxes for the rich, raise social benefits, and probably end a war. Obama acted under a pattern that appeals to the Americans. Many called him a "second Kennedy." His winning image was practically failsafe. He looked even more charming because of his admittedly respectful attitude toward his rivals, including Hillary Clinton. He almost stayed away from pouring dirt on his opponents, which is rare. Clinton and her team did not show as much restraint in this respect.
Later on, Obama did everything that a sensible graduate from Columbia University who may become the next American president should do, and was steadily moving toward his goal. Obama distanced himself from the church he went to for 20 years, because his religious mentor made politically incorrect statements. He did this easily for political reasons, but it did not occur to anyone to call him a renegade. Americans understand this model of behavior.
Obama is neither better nor worse than Clinton, who has a higher rating of mistrust. It goes without saying that he deserves respect for his long and uphill battle. A son of a Kenyan immigrant, he has approached the summit of political authority in the world's strongest power.
As a nominee, Hillary Clinton has a lot of shortcomings compared with Obama. American analysts criticize her for her long-standing involvement in the political elite, and for being too divorced from the nation.
But she is fighting till the very end even when facts rather than predictions are against her.
Needless to say, her refusal to admit defeat is at the same time a step toward admitting it. She simply could not do that to the accompaniment of encouraging cheers from her fans. Maybe they are more important for her than Democratic unity, no matter what party leaders and political analysts think. She has put her destiny in the hand of the voters, and asked them to write to her site and help her make a decision. This is an important signal, and a big plus in the eyes of her supporters and even opponents. Incidentally, Republican Richard Nixon did the same thing, but he asked the voters to write him ordinary letters rather than e-mails.
The former first lady will stand to gain a lot from not recognizing Obama's victory. It will raise her prestige. After all, no runner-up has collected so many votes.
This will almost guarantee her a place on Obama's ticket and good chances for another presidential bid in eight, or even four years.
This will help her avoid repaying at least part of the multi-million dollar debt to sponsors, which was accumulated during her campaign.
Finally, this will make her a VIP in her party.
In theory, she can continue the race. It is possible to appeal against halving Michigan and Florida's votes in the party's mandate committee. She can hope against hope that 200 superdelegates (top members of the Democratic Party who can choose to support a candidate regardless of primary results) will suddenly turn away from Obama and side with her. She is not likely to entertain such hopes, but it is more honorable to attend the convention as a nominee than a loser.
These primaries will go down in history not only because of Clinton's extravagant act, or because a woman and a black man had real chances of becoming an American president for the first time. There were many other firsts.
It is also the first time that the political elite was bewildered by the normal human desire to fight to the very end.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
