Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Full Metal Pantsuit

She fought hard. She fought long. But in the end, Hillary Clinton was simply unable to catch Barack Obama. Although her most ardent supporters will point accusatory fingers at the media and the DNC, the reality is that her campaign was flawed from the very beginning. At the outset, she suffered from the complacency and arrogance that accompanied her frontrunner status. Everyone assumed the nomination was Clinton's to lose. And lose it she did. Her greatest strength was supposed to be her experience. But Obama smartly picked up on voter disdain for eight years of Bush and Cheney, and delivered a promise of "change". His youth and inexperience suddenly became virtues. Hillary, on the other hand, was transformed into a representative of the old guard. While the Clinton campaign focussed on a "big state" strategy, Obama plugged away in smaller states, midwest states, and caucus states. His grassroots level fundraising was a resounding success. And by the time Hillary's team had figured all of this out, Super Tuesday was over, and Obama had a delegate lead he would never relinquish.

Now the only question is: will she be the veep?


The Mound of Sound said...

Maybe Obama should be looking to someone who hasn't just very recently and repeatedly and openly mused about the assassination of Bobby Kennedy. If he's forced to go this joint ticket route you can mark my words that he'll never be able to function properly because he'll always have to be watching his back - against BOTH of them.

She is never going to "serve" Obama. She wants a vice-presidency in which she can advance her agenda over his at her pleasure.

Anonymous said...

the mound of sound has been on a daily rant about her - rather obnoxious and I wonder why such a personal interest in a situation that "Americans" decide.

I watched a little documentary on her campaign and when you look back she was totally attacked unfairly - because she's a woman. From people saying iron my shirt to her hair, clothes, etc.

Obama has had it so easy from the press and quite frankyly Hillary did him a favour - toughened him up.

During his campaign Obama actually, indirectly insulted Bill Clinton noting other Democratic presidents and saying you can't go back to Clinton's 90's which were the best apparently for the US since the second world war.

So, I notice in his speech tonight he finally gave credit to Bill Clinton - finally.

....mound of sound and others...are trying to indicate that Hillary plans to assassinate Obama - talk about nutbars.

Red Canuck said...

MOS - I tend to agree that Clinton wouldn't be his ideal running mate. The Clintons represent an extremely powerful political machine, and I think Obama would prefer to start with a clean slate. I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that Hillary would actively try to sabotage Obama, but it would certainly make life difficult for him to have Bill Clinton looking over his shoulder every single day. And any attempt to strongarm her way into the VP slot would undoubtedly be met with resentment by the Obama camp. (Lanny Davis is already circulating a petition asking for her to be named VP).

Red Canuck said...

Anon - I watched a little documentary on her campaign and when you look back she was totally attacked unfairly - because she's a woman.

That's an easy excuse for a campaign that was mismanaged from the very beginning. Sure, there were some morons out there who were wearing insulting, misogynistic T Shirts. But these people were in the minority. To suggest that Hillary was the victim of widespread misogyny is, I think, disingenouous.

She didn't lose because she's a woman. She lost because she was outcampaigned by Obama. She didn't read the electorate well, she didn't fundraise well, and she underestimated Obama.

Obama has had it so easy from the press

I don't think the Obama camp would agree. The press hammered him over Jeremiah Wright, over his "bitter" comment, over Tony Rezko, over the flag lapel pin etc etc. All of which had nothing to do with his qualifications to be President.

During his campaign Obama actually, indirectly insulted Bill Clinton

I'm not sure how talking about the prosperity of the Clinton '90s is insulting to Bill Clinton. And Bill himself had some choice words about Obama during the campaign.

....mound of sound and others...are trying to indicate that Hillary plans to assassinate Obama - talk about nutbars.

I think MOS might be speaking metaphorically. Hillary's Bobby Kennedy comments were bizarre, and curious to say the least. But I certainly don't think she intends to physically harm Obama - that's downright crazy!

Anonymous said...

red canuck,,, she was not outcampained by the wind bag, she was stabbed in the back by cnn msnbc and people like you, who cant see reality, most have, look at the picture, the little sooty tan man looking down at people...

The Mound of Sound said...

You have to be a tad unhinged to believe I really suggested that Hillary was going to assassinate Obama. What I said was that there were indications she was going to keep stabbing him in the back and helping John McCain long after the nomination had been decided on delegates and that, it appears, is still Hillary's reality.

Hillary, sad to say, is completely untrustworthy. The way she agreed initially to dump the Michigan and Florida primaries and then did a complete 180 when she became desperate shows her utter lack of integrity.

Sorry Anon but this was her election to lose, she lost, get over it. And racist cracks about the "sooty little tan man" only undermine your credibility too.

Red Canuck said...

Anon - she was not outcampained by the wind bag, she was stabbed in the back by cnn msnbc and people like you

"Stabbed in the back" implies a betrayal of some sort. The networks owed her nothing, hence they could not have betrayed her. Similarly, how do you propose that "people like [me]" stabbed Hillary in the back? That's preposterous.

Rather than blaming everyone but Santa Claus for Hillary's defeat, perhaps it's more reasonable to consider that her campaign was not as well managed as Obama's, and that her message didn't resonate with voters the way that Obama's did.

the little sooty tan man

Bravo. I guess its true that Hillz was attracting the racist vote...

MD said...

If you actually watch Hillary's RFK comments in context, they were quite innocuous and should not have made the news. But they were not the reason she lost..and she certainly lost to a better leader.

Its pretty easy to easy to attack GWB's war in 2008 when his approval ratings are abysmal and the public is disgusted with it. The true test of leadership and keen judgement was in 2002 when Commander and Chief Bush offered his war resolution to Congress amid a sea of hyperpatriotism and midterm elections 3 weeks away.

While Hillary and the other Democratic sheep in the Senate were dutifully voting for bloodshed, Obama was addressing anti-war rallies in Chicago. He may have less experience, but time and time again he has shown better judgement, and more forward thinking.

For instance, Hillary may not be as gifted a speaker as Obama, but there is no way she should have been the underdog in fundraising given her connections in the party establishment. Obama simply realized the communication and small donation fundraising potential of the internet, and took action.

Obama will certainly make the better president should he win. I'm still not convinced that he will...my gut feeling is that McCain will win (although I'm more hopeful after watching McCain's pathetic speech where he went to New Orleans to tell people they don't need government help).

Red Canuck said...

MD - Hillary's RFK comment was in response to a question about why people wanted her to drop out of the race. In that context, it made no sense whatsoever. The implication was that something unexpected (like an assassination) might happen to Obama. Her explanation was that she was simply citing a historical fact...which again in the context of the question she had been asked made no sense.

No matter what the reason, it was a silly and ill-advised topic to bring up. But you're quite right that it's not the reason she lost (the race was essentially over by then anyways).

The fundraising issue is a key one. No one could have imagined that a Clinton could be outdone in fundraising by a relative political newcomer. And no one can argue that her inability to raise money like Obama was due to some sort of gender bias; again, it was a shortfall in her campaign management.