February 25, 2008

hillary While I think it’s way too early for people to be proclaiming Hillary Clinton’s once-inevitable acension to the Democratic nomination dead, she is clearly in troubled waters. More than that, she has found herself in the unenviable position of not being able to effectively counter Barack Obama in traditional political ways – if she tries the high road via the earnest, well-meaning, “policy wonk/issues” route, Obama has already proven he can out-wonk her and be just as articulate about it; if takes the low road and goes on the attack, as she did on Saturday, she sounds shrill (frankly, bitchy), thus revealing her general “unlikeability” problem.

In the end, if indeed her campaign does go down in flames, it will boil down to two general factors, one she could little to overcome, and one horribly self-inflicted, whether by her, her campaign, or both.

In the first case, Kirk Caraway in Sunday’s Nevada Appeal, more than anything, points to what I have been saying all along – that Hillary Clinton’s Barack Obama problem hints at an even greater hurdle she would face come the general election – the fact that, at the very core, she remains, after all this time and all this campaigning, virtually unelectable:

Forty-seven percent. That is the hurdle that has stood in front of Hillary Clinton since the day she announced her intention to run for president.

Forty-seven percent is the portion of Americans who have a negative opinion of Clinton, and getting them to change their minds is extremely difficult.

Not that she hasn’t tried. Her campaign began with an effort to “reintroduce herself to the American people,” and her claims that she was the most famous person Americans didn’t know.

How did that work out?

Overcoming that 47 percent is not an insurmountable task. George W. Bush won both his presidential elections with 48 percent of voters casting their ballots for his opponents.

But going into a race knowing that she had 47 percent of the people against her meant that Clinton had to run a perfect campaign. There was no room for any slippage of support, any gaffes that might push more voters to oppose her.

And for a while, it looked like she was doing just that.

Early in this contest, she was positioned as the front-runner, always on message and riding high above the rest of the field. She was the New England Patriots of presidential candidates.

But then along came Barack Obama. More of a movement than a campaign, Obama created a real challenge to Clinton. And when they lined up to battle for the top prize, the vaunted Clinton Machine fell apart.

As I’ve pointed out previously in this very spot, Hillary’s main problem is that, frankly, people – especially men – don’t like her, and, given the chance in a quiet dark ballot box, would go out of their way to vote against her. And it has nothing to do with her as a woman; rather, it has everything to do with her smarmy, “I’m smarter than you and I know it and am not afraid to show it” persona. Consider other females of the political arena – Margaret Thatcher, the tough-as-nails former British Prime Minister, Elizabeth Dole, Laura Bush, or Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice – these are equally educated, smart, and (in their own ways) strong female politicians who have in their own genetic make-up a likeability factor that Hillary simply can’t, and never will, be able to match.

As for the second point, about that horrible, self-inflicted wound her campaign inflicted upon itself, may I point to this New York Times piece, which alludes to something else I’ve been saying all along: if I were running the Clinton campaign, I would have told husband Bill to take a nice long vacation in Tahiti:

Over take-out meals and late-night drinks, some regrets and recriminations have set in, and top aides have begun to face up to the campaign’s possible end after the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4. Engaging in hindsight, several advisers have now concluded that they were not smart to use former President Bill Clinton as much as they did, that “his presence, aura and legacy caused national fatigue with the Clintons,” in the words of one senior adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity to assess the campaign candidly.

Without question, all that bringing him aboard – and, even worse, putting him front and center – did was to: 1) diminish her in the minds of her seemingly-unshakeable gender base as a strong, independent female candidate capable of standing on her own two feet, 2) remind voters of what the “Clinton fatigue” of the late ’90s was all about, and 3) reveal her to be a rather poor imitation of the charismatic “rock star” politician her husband (like him or not) was in Democratic circles.

In hindsight, I can only shake my head in wonder at what her campaign must have been thinking. You have a (supposedly) strong, intelligent female candidate with the already formidable support of many baby-boomer and older women, and how do you showcase her talents? By dragging out her obnoxious and philandering husband in front of every camera and reporter and allow him to run his mouth off at both ends? All this ended up doing was cause many women to question just how “independent” and “strong” Hillary Clinton was, both as a woman and as a presidential candidate, and make voters in general question who, in fact, would actually be running the White House were she to be elected.

The result has been an absolute disaster for the Hillary! candidacy. People like Susan Estrich can hypothesize all they want that, deep down, the rejection of Hillary! is the rejection of her as a woman, but I would counter that her campaign’s strategy has never allowed her to run as a woman, but rather – and more omniously to many voters – as a Clinton (i.e., the “Billary” candidacy).

And that has been the difference.

Want a time-tested recipe for political disaster? Combine one part unlikeability factor with one part inherent weakness on display; that, my friends (as John McCain is wont to say), is the crux of the biscuit and a formula in politics for a one-way ticket to Palookaville. Which is why, if Hillary Clinton is going to salvage her sinking campaign, she’s going to have to pull off the political equivalent of pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

And frankly, it couldn’t happen to a more deserving person.

Filed in: Politics & World Events by The Great White Shank at 01:42 | Comments Off on Hillary’s Two Problems
No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Search The Site

Recent Items


September 2021
April 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006



4 Goodboys Only

Site Info