What desperation looks like
Well, this little tid-bit has just reaffirmed my rather new decision to write-in someone for president if Hillary Clinton lands the Democratic nomination since now she's decided to play the 'it's harder to be a white woman than a black man' card, and Andrew Sullivan's take is pretty much what mine is.
Of course her entire last week has been one of the most disappointing spectacles in Democratic politics in quite some time. It got kicked off with a hissy fit over criticism of her health care plan via a mailer. We had the 'did-she or didn't-she' deal with her maybe, but we're not sure, passing a photo of Barack Obama in traditional Somali garb onto Matt Drudge, a Republican blogger. Her campaign strategist, Mark Penn, has now boldly claimed that Obama has to win both Texas and Ohio in order for him to claim victory in the race (not that it matters, since Penn already has said Texas doesn't matter, just like all of Obama's other victories).
Finally, we have the 'Red Phone' ad which conjures up some connected memories of Lyndon Johnson's 'Daisy' ad.
Of course, Obama hit back in a response ad that absolutely humiliated her original attack and provided a nice touch of parody to boot, and he did it within hours of her ad hitting the air waves, which is that much more impressive.
Rarely have I ever - ever - had my impressions of someone change so dramatically over the course of a few months. I have long been a supporter and defender of the Clintons, but this campaign has been such a hideous train wreck that has shown so much contempt for not just Obama, but his supporters, the states that support him and the entire system itself (when, of course, it wasn't working to their benefit), that I can't reconcile myself with supporting her should she be the nominee.
Fortunately, it doesn't appear she will be.
Of course her entire last week has been one of the most disappointing spectacles in Democratic politics in quite some time. It got kicked off with a hissy fit over criticism of her health care plan via a mailer. We had the 'did-she or didn't-she' deal with her maybe, but we're not sure, passing a photo of Barack Obama in traditional Somali garb onto Matt Drudge, a Republican blogger. Her campaign strategist, Mark Penn, has now boldly claimed that Obama has to win both Texas and Ohio in order for him to claim victory in the race (not that it matters, since Penn already has said Texas doesn't matter, just like all of Obama's other victories).
Finally, we have the 'Red Phone' ad which conjures up some connected memories of Lyndon Johnson's 'Daisy' ad.
Of course, Obama hit back in a response ad that absolutely humiliated her original attack and provided a nice touch of parody to boot, and he did it within hours of her ad hitting the air waves, which is that much more impressive.
Rarely have I ever - ever - had my impressions of someone change so dramatically over the course of a few months. I have long been a supporter and defender of the Clintons, but this campaign has been such a hideous train wreck that has shown so much contempt for not just Obama, but his supporters, the states that support him and the entire system itself (when, of course, it wasn't working to their benefit), that I can't reconcile myself with supporting her should she be the nominee.
Fortunately, it doesn't appear she will be.
posted by Jmac at 9:17 AM
4 Comments:
I'm not even going to attempt to defend HRC's campaign strategy or even character (though you know my bias), but I am curious...what if the interview was with Obama and read:
Asked why he thinks so many African Americans may be feeling sorry for him [note: I think another phrase would have been used here, but whatever], Obama said, "I think a lot of African Americans project their own feelings and their lives onto me, and they see how hard this is. It's hard. It's hard being an African American out there. It is obviously challenging with some of the things that are said that are not even personal to me so much as they are about African Americans.
"And I think African Americans just sort of shake their head," Obama continued. "My friends do. They say, 'Oh, my gosh, this is so hard.' Well, it's supposed to be hard. I'm running for the hardest job in the world. No one has ever done this. No African American has ever won a presidential primary before I won New Hampshire [um..maybe caucus and Iowa]. This is hard. And I don't expect any sympathy, I don't expect any kind of, you know, allowances or special privileges, because I knew what I was getting myself into.
"Every so often I just wish that it were a little more of an even playing field," he said, "but, you know, I play on whatever field is out there."
Would your response be the same? Would you cite a blog that called said he was 'whining' and called him a narcissist? [even if he had entered the race as the anointed one]
This is not a weighted comment/inquiry -- just genuine curiosity (not like HRC's "curiosity" about being asked questions first in the debates!).
Courtney
I think that's a fair question, but it requires a complicated answer, and a one that is rather specific due to the situation we've been presented with.
I point this out because part of the reason I find Clinton's take on this whole thing so incredulous is because of her position coming in. As Sullivan notes in his post, it's impossible to play the victim card when you're not really the victim. Outside of an incumbent or a sitting vice president, Clinton entered the race with more intangibles working for her than any candidate in a long, long time (easily since Eisenhower).
She possessed name recognition that was unrivaled by any other candidate from either party. She possessed a large financial war chest and vast networks of backers and friends. She had a former president acting as her surrogate and, not only that, but a vastly popular former president who was considered a political mastermind.
If the tables were reversed and Obama had entered a race like this with such a support system, run an atrocious campaign and then started tossing out the victim card then, yes, I would have deep problems with that.
However, it's important to note that this isn't the only instance of the Clinton campaign doing something which offended me. Her feigned outrage over the health care mailer, after repeatedly implying that Obama lacked the intellectual and policy chops to go toe-to-toe with her, was comically insulting. The 'did she/didn't she' reach out to Matt Drudge was a slap in the face to Democrats. The 'Red Phone' ad was a pathetic attempt at Rovian politics.
The point being was that all of that was beneath her, and it can largely be attributed to her staff's savagely awful management of her campaign and their blatant disregard of folks who don't think like them.
These are strong views, but I hold these strong views about Clinton because, at one time, she and her husband could count on me as one of their most adament defenders. However, as with most folks, something about Obama was different and exciting and promising, and it was impossible to ignore.
And rather than respect that someone else had come along who was worthy of the challenge, her campaign worked to tear him down for her own personal benefit, while attempting to marginalize those who shared nothing more than a difference of opinion.
Indeed Clinton's campaign has been the stuff of establishment politics and is in sharp contrast to what Obama has offered. I think this is largely why she will lose and, though I voted for her and continue to support her, probably deservedly so.
And, so, I understand the context of your feelings about the comment, but I do think that her point is a good one and one worth having a discussion about (not us - the nation). While Hilary enjoyed (more and more in the past tense) the support of the Democratic machine - with it's money and superstars, this seems to be - at some level - what folks are actually voting against.
I don't know -- the larger issue I've been contemplating is what this means for the women's movement in general. Feminism is all but dead in the US and I think the HRC candidacy might have been the final nail in its coffin. I think what could have been a boost for the movement died with the campaign. Much of this, of course, is due to the HRC campaign itself -- one that young women in particular did not feel connected, one that was not about 'change' and 'hope'. But now I'm really fearful that folks will say, "see the playing field is level. look how far she got. her losing was her own doing and not reflective of gender issues still present." And, as much fault as I see in the HRC campaign (believe me, there are few more upset by it than feminists), I think these issues do still exist.
At the same time, I'm fearful that a nation with an African American president will convince itself that racism is not a hugely powerful force here. Obviously a risk worth taking, but still...
Courtney
Not that I'm defending HRC JMac, but this:
"And rather than respect that someone else had come along who was worthy of the challenge, her campaign worked to tear him down for her own personal benefit, while attempting to marginalize those who shared nothing more than a difference of opinion."
sounds kinda naive. Welcome to democracy! People with strong personal abmititions have to go out and win a popularity contest with a WIDE variety of interest groups. When another contestant comes along who is a good challenger, HRC did what virtually EVERY ambitious person in her position within the democractic system would do: she tried to make herself more popular.
Popularlity contests are always shallow, amoral, catty, and rhetorically overdone. "Nothing more than a difference in opinion" is all that separates ANY two candidates in a race; yet Dems and Repubs 'try to tear each other down for their own personal benefit' constantly. I know Obama is claiming to stand for something different, but what exactly? A world in which you can win a beauty contest voted on by frat boys without showing pictures of the other girl's cottage cheese thighs? Obama has that charisma-gravitas-congeniality thing going which is inexplicable and very fortunate. It means he GETS to be 'above it all' and act like a perfect angel who is different, b/c the audience at the pageant is already abuzz with this 'glow' about him anyway. But if he lost his lead, he would claw and bite and maim to get it back. He would figure out the places where Hillary is most vulnerable to public opinion and he would attack her there. If that happened to be a policy issue, great. IF it happened to be that people think she's a bitch, then he would make use of that. You win popularity contests by exploiting WHATEVER is unpopular (or can be spun as though it is unpopular) in your competitors.
There is only one job opening for president. They both want it. They will do whatever they have to do to get it. Do you disagree?
Post a Comment
<< Home