Hillary Clinton's self-proclaimed inevitability has taken a nasty tumble in the last four weeks since the Democratic debate held on October 30, 2007.
With only 37 days to go until the crucial Iowa caucus, it's normal for the Democratic frontrunner to lose ground in the polls as more voters and caucus-goers pay heed to the nomination race.
What's not normal is that the frontrunner denies his/he vulnerability, and continues to act the part of inevitable conqueror.
That is not a smart strategy, but a losing campaign plan born of arrogant belief in one's own flattering press clippings.
The key question now is: Can Hillary Clinton right her campaign strategy, and get her winning mojo back?
How Hillary (Momentarily?) Lost Her Mojo
Sen. Clinton's stumble started at the October 30, 2007 debate when she tried to simultaneously stake out several opposing positions on a hot-buttom immigration issue.
Competitors called her on it, and she fumed and fumbled. Within days after that debate, she ham-handedly played the gender card and the "unfair piling on a girl" card. (See Obama vs. Clinton: Badly Playing the Gender Victimhood Card.)
None of the card tricks worked. Subsequent polls in Iowa showed Sen. Obama catching up with Sen. Clinton in Iowa, and in New Hampshire polls, Clinton lost ten ponts of her lead over Obama, Edwards and Richardson.
Next came the Democrats' November 15, 2007 debate with planted booers hissing Obama and Edwards when they dared question Hillary Clinton. The pre-planned, girlie question for Hillary about pearls and diamonds. And CNN stacking the broadcast with fawning former members of the Clinton administration. (See CNN Debate in Las Vegas: Tainted by the Hillary Advantage .)
Despite a masterful debate performance by Sen. Clinton, she was judged a loser because the event was widely decried as dishonestly rigged to benefit her.
And so, the Clintonian twin problems of forthrightness and trustworthiness reared their spoilsport heads. And Hillary Clinton appears indignant, angry, irritated... which is never the mood of an electoral winner.
Bad Press Since Thanksgiving
The spate of bad press for the Clintons since Thanksgiving weekend, though, has been breathtaking in volume and meanness.
- On November 26, Sen. Clinton gave an interview with Katie Couric of CBS News in which the senator said that she's never considered that anyone else would win the Democratic nomination. The press twisted this innocuous statement into damning proof of her arrogance. In truth, it was a no-big deal-statement, one that might be uttered by any politician anywhere in the world.
- Then on November 27, President Bill Clinton commented on the campaign trail that he "opposed Iraq from the beginning." And the liberal community reacted in rage at this shading of history.
Scolded top blogger Oliver Willis:
"That's just not true. I don't think its right to put President Clinton in the role of war supporter, but if he was against the war only he and Sen. Clinton know for sure because he didn't say a thing about it...
"You can easily compare his silence to that of his vice-president, Al Gore, who was vocally and clearly opposed to the war from day one...
"There is no public record of any sort to support President Clinton's assertion that he 'opposed Iraq from the beginning'. That just didn't happen."
Again, Bill Clinton's words were a minor statement, and of little relevance to Sen. Clinton's bid for the presidential nomination. But much ado has been made of it anyway.
- The AFP news service reported on November 28 that 'Hillary Haters' Out in Force as 2008 Votes Loom. The article reports that a "Stop Hillary" site at Facebook has recruited thousands of anti-Clinton activists, and that one particularly ridiculous group hawks anti-HIllary Christmas tree ornaments.
- And, of course, the political blogosphere, both liberal and conservative, has been incessantly abuzz for a month with rumors about the actual roles of Hillary Clinton's top aide and constant staff companion, Huma Abedin, a 32-year-old American citizen of Pakistani origins.
Will Hillary Get Her Mojo Back?
Make no mistake about it: at this writing, Sen. Hillary Clinton is the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential race.
But her lead is fading, and is likely gone in Iowa. In fact, former House speaker Newt Gingrich predicted on November 27:
"My guess is Senator Obama's going to win Iowa and that he's going to win it by a surprising margin."
Will Hillary Clinton get her leader-of-the-pack mojo back?
Can she counteract her polarizing "negatives" recently cited by Karl Rove?
Can she keep her husband from making unhelpful comments on the stump while still using his charismatic presence to her advantage?
Can she effectively fight the perception of the Clintons as politically slippery and ethically challenged?
Can she move past her grating presumption of inevitability, and comfortably compete on a level playing field with her competitors?
Or does all of this require more humility than is held in the hearts and souls of Hill and Bill?
I pray not, as Hillary Clinton would surely be a capable, well-qualified President of the United States who would make our country proud once again.
(Photo taken at the Nov 15, 2007 Democratic debate: Ethan Miller/Getty Images)
Related Reading
Obama vs. Clinton: What Do the Iowa Polls Mean?
Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: The Iowa Niceness Factor
"Well, it Will Be Me": The Nov. 26th Katie / Hillary Interview (Women's Issues)
Personal Profile of Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York
Comments
I don’t agree with your assessment of Hillary as president. I think she would make a terrible one.
I am a democrat and a woman but, I do not support Hillary.
There are many reasons why. I find her to be untrustworthy and a typical slimy pol.
She is tied to the establishment and failed policies of the last 20 years.
she refuses to answer questions and doesn’t take a stand or do detail on policy. Dodge, duck and weave. Triangulate and throw mud.
And she has agreed with Bush more than any democrat outside Liebermann.
She is a neocon hawk.
Most of all, she has a long record of incredibly bad judgment.
I can see you have no clue how Bill’s statements yesterday hit a nerve with the progressives in the party. We are half the party and of all ages and stripes.
You cannot rewrite history to suit you. Bill did not come out against the war like Gore did. He defended Bush and his war early on. Now that it’s unpopular with the people and because Obama took a brave and public stand against it, Bill now is rewriting history. You are darn right we are mad about his statements yesterday. You don’t play Clintonian games with war.
my xmas wish is that Obama crushes her in Iowa and New Hampshire, SC and Nevada. I hope the people wake up to see her for the person she is.
I don’t understand how the anti-Hillary faction on Facebook is even mentionable. If Facebook’s group support is worth anything, then Ron Paul must be ahead of Romney and Giuliani in the Republican race by alarming margins. Facebook is hardly a respectable political thermometer.
This is totally unrelated, but I watched the republican YouTube debate last night and came out not only terribly disturbed by the ridiculous ignorance and abundance of racist and homophobic comments, but also worried about the possibility of Obama facing up against any of those guys. I just don’t feel confident that he could match them politically in a national race. It’s going to be such a hugely important, cutthroat race and I just don’t know if he has it in him.
I sure hope Hillary gets the nomination. As much as I don’t feel personally aligned with Edwards, I do feel like he might be the only other candidate politically prepared for what’s going to be a very tough race next year.