Kirk: Clinton Wouldn't Be Able to Govern

Political Players is a weekly conversation with the leaders, consultants, and activists who shape American politics. This week, CBS News' Brian Goldsmith talked with former Dallas Mayor -- and U.S. Senate nominee -- Ron Kirk about his presidential candidate, Barack Obama, and next Tuesday's potentially decisive Texas primary.

CBSNews.com: You signed on with Senator Obama very early. What attracted you to him?

Ron Kirk: Well, I met him when he was first thinking about running for the Senate. And I was impressed, first, with just his intellect and also his sincerity about making sure that ordinary people had the same voice, the same access to the powers of government. There is something indefinably different about him, and genuine.

CBSNews.com: Senator Clinton, and President Clinton, both helped you in your Senate race in 2002. Both stood by you at other points in your career. Did you feel that you were disappointing them?

Ron Kirk: You know, I did not want to disappoint them because the Clintons have been very good friends of mine and very good to me. But I will tell you, for me, the decision to support Barack when he called was so easy. Because I just felt like this was a very unique moment in time in the life of our country. And that he was maybe singularly suited to provide that leadership. But I have all the respect in the world for Senator Clinton.

CBSNews.com: What kind of leadership do you think he can provide that she can't?

Ron Kirk: Well, one, I think he gives us a chance for a fresh start. And to some degree, I have a great empathy for Senator Clinton because a lot of her challenges aren't of her own making. But there is, fair or not, a sense that the country is entering a little bit of Bush/Clinton fatigue.

And they just are. In a way, that's unfair to her because she is a very gifted public servant. And she is strongly committed and passionate about the issues that she cares about. But I think a lot of Americans and a lot of Texans, a lot of people I've heard just feel like, you know, the level of extreme partisanship in Washington right now is unhealthy for this country.

And rightly or wrongly, many of us on the Democratic side believe it was driven by the almost extreme mania that some in the Republican party harbor for the Clintons in a negative way. And then, unfortunately, that was returned in kind by some of the Democratic side. But even saying that, the reality is that there just aren't a lot of people that believe that--as brilliant as she may be, and as passionate as she may be--that Hillary Clinton would really ever have a chance to govern because this partisanship would rise again.

I sense that the people believe that Barack Obama presents the best hope America's had in a long time to, at least, try to come in and do what George Bush said he was going to do--and that's to be a uniter and not a divider. But it just seemed a lot more credible coming from Barack Obama than it did coming from George Bush or anybody else.

CBSNews.com: So a couple of months ago, as you well know, Senator Obama was trailing significantly in African-American support behind Senator Clinton. Now, he has almost the complete support of the African American community. Most notably, this week, John Lewis switched sides and is now backing Senator Obama. What do you think led to this groundswell for Obama?

Ron Kirk: I think it's a number of things. One, he's a first term senator. A lot of people didn't know him. America didn't quite know him the way Illinois did.

Secondly, the fact that the Clintons positioned themselves like they were inevitable and had this incredible machine and were going to have such a fundraising advantage over Senator Obama. And if you remember last summer when people saw the extraordinary numbers that he raised and that they weren't coming from traditional sources, people go, "wow, well, at least, he's going to have the resources to make a case."

Then, that extraordinary victory in Iowa in which a lot of people, both black and white, had to kind of take note and say, "Well maybe, you know, he can win in the state in which it's not just a black thing." And then, I think, it was the graciousness of his speech in New Hampshire, where he lost. But I think it was the cumulative effect of all of those.

CBSNews.com: What was it, do you think, about Bill Clinton that really seemed to get to people in South Carolina?

Ron Kirk: You know, I want to say this. I have too much respect for the Clintons and what they have done for the country. And particularly, you know, there is an enormous wellspring of affinity and powerful emotions for the Clintons within the African-American community.

But a lot of us feel like just as we went out on a limb and supported Bill Clinton in 1992, we are as attracted to Barack Obama. And for whatever reason, his ridiculing of Barack before the South Carolina primary was just a horrible miscalculation. And I'm sure if he had that moment to do over, he would have expressed himself in a different way. But since this is a political game, the beneficiary of that was Barack Obama.

CBSNews.com: What specifically did he say that was such a miscalculation?

Ron Kirk: Well, I know it's fun to joke about the idea that Bill Clinton was the first black president. And he is very warmly regarded. But on the other hand, you know, it's kinda like anything. I can make fun of my cross-eyed son, but if you say it, well, we're gonna have a fight on our hands. (laughs)

And you are right. There were a lot of African-American voters that were sort of passive about Barack. And some questioned whether he was as aggressive as he should be and saying he's African American and not mixed. Interestingly enough, a lot of the same stuff that Tiger Woods got early on.

But it was not just Bill Clinton. I think the attack by former Ambassador Andy Young and then the insult by Bob Johnson just seemed to light a fire among a lot of young African Americans, particularly the professionals and others that haven't been as politically involved to say, you know, this is crazy.

There shouldn't be a litmus test. And it is not a bad thing that we finally have a candidate that can maybe move America beyond race. This is a place we've said we wanted to go for many, many generations. And now, we have a candidate who can take us there. And maybe we better be celebrating that.

CBSNews.com: Do you think it's unfair at all that Senator Obama could lose the popular vote in Texas but still walk away with more delegates?

Ron Kirk: As long as he winds up with the Democratic nomination. The one thing that Senator Obama has said, "You tell us what the rules are and we're willing to go play." Then, he has competed well in states in which people thought he shouldn't have.

He's competed well in small states, in big states, in caucus states. And we're going to be committed that we would go out and fight for every vote and every delegate and play by the rules as they exist. And so, if we come out victorious, no one will be more happy than I am.

CBSNews.com: But if that doesn't happen and he walks away with more delegates anyway, do you think it could strike people as a little undemocratic?

Ron Kirk: No. I mean, the parties have the right and the necessity to conduct their business. And Texas is just known for being different. We earn our moniker of being a different state. We hold our primary and caucus on the same day.

And we award delegates out of each process. And at the end of the day, it is the accumulation of all of those things that matters. And to his credit, Senator Obama has gone and competed all over this country, North and South and East and West, in red state and blue state, and put himself in a position to come out of this with the Democratic nomination. And if he does, I think he's earned it.