- 1
- 2
The Clintons’ Patronizing Strategy
I'm all for aggressive, even negative, campaigning, but I'm not so sure this patronizing approach will work for Hillary down the stretch. Let's take the battle in New Jersey, a delegate-rich state that votes on Feb. 5. Hillary will almost certainly win there, in her backyard, but the question is by how much. New Jersey delegates are awarded proportionally, which means that if Obama can come within five or ten points, he's ahead of the game in the national delegate hunt.
As the Reagan ad aired in South Carolina, Hillary was campaigning in New Jersey. That gave the Obama campaign an excuse to assemble a rapid response team to create a little backlash in the Garden State.
Cory Booker, the inspiring mayor of Newark, is especially popular with white liberals in the suburbs. Here's what he said about the Clinton ads, beyond calling them "outrageous" and "dishonest":
"We're trying to offer an alternative to the Republicans' fear and smear campaigns, and now we're being dragged down to their level by the Clintons."
I live in New Jersey and can attest that plenty of Democrats there will be responsive to Booker's argument, as well as that of New York-area newspapers blasting Hillary for the Reagan shot. Disgust with this kind of thing may help bring Obama closer than expected.
Bill Clinton rightly complained in the 1990s about the politics of personal destruction. In both 1992 and 1996 he managed to run general election campaigns against George Bush and Bob Dole that mostly stayed on the high road. Then, in 1998, he survived a withering assault by relying on the common sense of average people.
On the day his testimony about his sex life was being replayed on TV—arguably the most embarrassing day in the history of the presidency—I slipped into a reception for Clinton in New York.
He was amazingly serene. With enough time and information, the president told me, the American people figure out the truth. They aren't as dumb as [former House GOP strategist] Tom DeLay thinks, he suggested. "The people always get it right," Clinton said.
They did then, supporting Clinton against a witch hunt. But will they now?
© 2008
- 1
- 2
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: AngMait @ 02/12/2008 12:34:46 AM
Comment: Sorry - I made a small typo below. Obama's statement specifically referred to the Republican Party being the Party of ideas for the past 10-15 years - not as I initially state, the last '15-20 years'.
Regarding eddiewhere's rationale (below) for not voting for Clinton 'too many scandals' - there's a famous story of Richard Nixon meeting in the Oval Office with Kissinger. Nixon's dog. King Timahoe, was chewing the carpet. To get him to stop Nixon gave the dog a biscuit. To which Kissinger said the following "Mr President if you give him a biscuit he'll just continue chewing the carpet." Eddie - you are just giving the Republicans a biscuit. It's actually the last thing you want to do.
Are you Democrats suffering from Stockholm Syndrome?
Posted By: AngMait @ 02/12/2008 12:16:05 AM
Comment: Jonathan:
If you want to find an eye-gouger just review Obama's victory speech in South Carolina. Or, just look at his ad which you quote from "Hilary will say anything and change nothing". By the way, in your judgement is that 'demonstrably false" or does the statement just apply to you?
While he was pandering to the Reno Gazette, Obama said that the "Republicans were the Party of ideas for the past 15 to 20 years". This is a time frame that specifically excludes Ronald Reagan. If you check you'll see that Hillary's question at the debate had nothing to do with Ronald Reagan. Neither did her radio ad. So, I don't know why you keep going on about him. In the last 10-15 years there have been only two Presidents - George Bush Jr and Bill Clinton. Please let us all know whether you agree with him that the Presidency of George Bush Jr has been more the Party of Ideas than the eight years of the last President from Obama's own party? Why would he say that - unless he was willing to say anything to get elected?
Can you please let us all know exactly why you think these were 'completely ordinary comments' on his part - from a 'Democrat'? What do you think he meant because you kinda left that part out. Could he have been seeking a tiny little endorsement from a Republican newspaper? Which he got?
You criticize Clinton for going at him on this quite incredible statement on his part. Her radio ad in South Carolina merely asked questions - which ideas was Obama referring to - it asked? This is typical in all politics (Obama included) as can be demonstrated by the Obama campaign's willfully misleading claims that Bill Clinton was referring to his entire campaign a 'fairy tale'. Now that is something that WAS truly 'demonstrably false'.
Posted By: eddiewhere @ 01/30/2008 3:10:46 AM
Comment: IT is OBVIOUS that the DEMCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT KNOWs THAT OBAMA is the CANDIDATE with the BEST CHANCE to win in NOVEMBER. EVERY statistic and poll supports this fact The DEMOCRATIC party cannot risk losing the WHITE HOUSE. The only obstacle standing in OBAMA's way is the LATINO VOTE.
THE CLINTON"S ARE JUST TO polarizing. Too many scandals, to many investigations. I do not believe they are guilty in all those scandals I just believe AMERICA needs a change from the establishment. We do not need a years worth of divisive campaigning. IT would be amazing to see McCain vs OBAMA. A GOOD CLEAN HEAVY WEIGHT FIGHT. NO ONE GETS THEIR EAR BIT OFF. A ROMNEY CAMpaign would be just like BUSH'S very divisive and full of lies. IF AMERICA CHOOSES THESE TWO CANDIDATES to represent their respective parties then I think the AMERICAN political process can begin to heal and set an example to the rest of the world. WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE WE SENDING IRAQIS and AFGHANS. IF we promote racial divide why shoud they give us the benefit of the doubt concerning ABU GRADE and BLACK WATER. ARE WE REALLY RACIST CAN IT BE THAT THE CLINTON"S ARE A REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY. DIVIDE people so we the CLINTON'S can attain the power we are entitled too and so rightfully deserve after my conduct in the OVAL OFFICE. No one else is capable of being president. I will become nasty and play the race card because the "MEDIA" is trying to take away the presidency from me and my wife.
OBAMA HAS TO GAIN GROUND WITH THE LATINO VOTE. HE NEEDS TO BLITZ THE LATINO"S WITH COMMERCIALS OF ECONOMIC prosperity.