HRC & the "Corrupt Bargain"

In 1824, Andrew Jackson, the founder of our beloved Democratic Party, was robbed of the presidency by what he called a "corrupt bargain." If Obama can maintain his lead in pledged delegates (a notion becoming widely accepted), it seems as though the only way Hillary Clinton can deny him of the nomination is through a smoke-filled, back-room deal reminiscent of the 1824 election.

Before there were hanging chads or voter disenfranchisement, there was the process that threw the presidential election to the House of Representatives  if no clear winner emerged from the vote. How?

The Twelfth Amendment (adopted in 1804 following the disputed Election of 1800) provided that elections in which no candidate received a majority should be decided by the House of Representatives from among the top three candidates.

In that election, there were four major contenders. William Crawford, a blind and dying man, represented the last of Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans. John Quincy Adams shared many of the same beliefs as Crawford but came from the Northeast and had a famous name and thus gained far more support from the Jeffersonians. The third candidate was Henry Clay,  future leader of the Whig Party and a well respected man in the House. Finally, there was Andrew Jackson, hero of the Battle of New Orleans.

Jackson, whose views were largely unknown despite his popularity, won the most electoral votes and won the popular vote. Adams came in second, Crawford came in third, and Clay came in fourth. Under the 12th Amendment, only the top three candidates could move on to the House.

Going into the House vote, Jackson felt confident of his chances; he had won the hearts and votes of the people and seemed like a no-brainer for House confirmation. However, Henry Clay had a different idea.

Had Clay been eligible in the House, many observers believe he would have won due to his popularity within the Congress. Knowing this, Adams approached Clay and the two of them sat down and had a meeting. While no one knows what was said in that meeting, Clay emerged as a supporter of Adams and Adams subsequently defeated Jackson on the first ballot of the House vote. Following his election to the presidency, Adams named Clay Secretary of State.

Jackson, furious, labeled this a "corrupt bargain."

One hundred and eighty-four years later, Hillary seems to want to deliver another corrupt bargain.

However, I think even Hillary knows that the corrupt bargain is becoming impossible.

First, a good chunk of superdelegates are politicians. Outside of the bluest of blue states, a great deal of members of Congress worry about the impact of being on the same ticket as Hillary. Obama continues to bolster his appeal to red state voters and it seems likely, as he gains momentum, that some of those red state superdelegates will turn in his direction.

Second, because they are politicians and their selection of who they vote for is very much public information, no superdelegate is going to want to vote against the will of the people and then have to face those people come November.

Third, the MSM is starting to buy into the Obama-McCain storyline (as are both of the candidates). So if the MSM is reporting that there is no way Hillary can overtake him in pledged delegates AND are starting to cover Obama-McCain spats with greater frequency, the average person is going to buy into the notion that the Democratic race is over.

Finally, people are downright excited about Barack Obama. He is drawing crowds not seen since the 60s. He has gotten young people not only involved in politics, but gotten them to actually vote too. And, in the aftermath of the Potomac Primary, Obama has begun to get the votes that were once considered to be Hillary's base (white votes, women, Hispanics, and blue collar workers). The mo is on his side. Who wants to be the guy/girl who ruins the party? Not you, Mr./Mrs. Superdelegate.

The only thing that I, and a lot of people, believe will keep Obama from winning the nomination is a corrupt bargain. And if the bargain happens, history has a precedent for us. Guess who won the 1828 election?