Hillary the Martyr Has Forgotten Bill's Advice: Vote Hope, Not Fear
Here's what I don't understand about Hillary Clinton's latter-day hyperdrive (since February 26, the final Democratic debate) to throw everything but the "kitchen sink" at rival Barack Obama before the March 4th primaries in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont:
- Why didn't Sen. Clinton campaign at hyperdrive pace all along in the race for the Democratic nomination? Did she arrogantly take for granted that the party nomination was hers? Did she believe her own blather about being "inevitable"?
- Why is her "kitchen sink" strategy devoid of issues, and instead, entirely reliant on fear, sarcasm, self-pity and goofy appearances on late-night comedy shows?
- Is it true that, if she doesn't like the results, she plans to sue to block the results of the Texas primary-caucus system of allocating delegates... a system that's functioned satisfactorily, unchallenged by anyone, for 40 years?
Hillary Clinton has apparently forgotten the wise advice to voters of former President Bill Clinton when he was campaigning in October 2004 for John Kerry:
"If one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other one’s trying to get you to think, if one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."
Sen. Clinton's use of fear to manipulate voters is hardly original in the political arena, but it's sadly cynical. I urge you to to take a moment to read Fear and Foreign Policy by Keith Porter, About.com's Guide to Foreign Policy, who describes the new fear-mongering ad by Clinton, and concludes that "fear and good foreign policy simply do not mix."
I detest the Clinton campaign's use of fear to scare voters... but that bothers me much less than her creepy use of cloying self-pity to motivate female voters to support her at the ballot box.
A few days ago, Sen. Clinton exemplied her fallback persona of victimhood laced potently with martyrdom when she told ABC News:
"It's hard. It's hard being a woman out there..."Every so often I just wish that it were a little more of an even playing field... but, you know, I play on whatever field is out there."
Pundit/blogger Andrew Sullivan phrased it perfectly at The Atlantic.com when he spat:
"Is she (expletive deleted) kidding me?"... You think it was a level playing field when Clinton bullied and cajoled and intimidated every Democrat to back her a year ago? You think it's a level playing field when you deploy a former president to tear down your opponent?
"Clinton has more privilege, more clout, more intrinsic unearned advantages in this race than any non-incumbent Democrat in living memory. And still she failed. And still she whines."
I'm starting to believe that asking Hillary Clinton to explain her cherished self-pity woud be about as useful as asking the late Richard Nixon why he was paranoid.
(Photo taken on March 1, 2008: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Related Reading
Clinton Draws Party Anger: Is Hillary Playing Fair?
Is Hillary Clinton Too Much Like George Bush?
Kansas City Star, Feb 28, 2008: Officials: Clinton aides threatened lawsuit over Texas caucuses
Comments
being a devoted reader and still supporting hillary (yeah, still), i’ll take a stab.
it’s been a weird campaign. as ickes said last week, hillary’s better than her campaign. i think that’s pretty plain. i think there was a sense of inevitability a year ago–everyone saw and felt it. i think that probably did make her campaign cocky, and i think some bad campaigning decisions were probably made.
i think the “unearned advantages” statement is a little far-reaching. i think it’s hard to say hillary, who’s known for being a very, very hard worker, has ever had any advantages (or, as we’re seeing, disadvantages) that she hasn’t earned on her own. powerful husband, or not.
i believe it’s hard for a woman out there running for president. as it always is in any arena where a woman is forging new territory. any viable, serious woman candidate for president from here on out will be held up against hillary’s path this campaign, for better or worse. the media hasn’t known how to respond to her, hasn’t known what standards to hold her to, hasn’t even entirely foregone talking about her hair, clothes, and make-up like it was a measure of her ability to lead.
i reckon for someone like hillary clinton, who has to know she’s a very intelligent, viable candidate, that’s hard. i don’t think acknowledging that is complaining. i think it’s acknowledging.
i laughed at the recent commercial, because it seemed like such a stretch. but then obama came back with the same commercial in his own language (saying, really, the same thing). so he’s not off the hook on that front, either.
it’s been an interesting campaign. who knows what’ll happen tomorrow. but, i do think hillary’s campaign staff has made some wrong turns. i do think she’s a far better candidate (and would make a far superior president) than her campaign and the media coverage of it has somehow led people to believe.
Kim-
My greatest frustration with Hillary’s campaign is that she doesn’t need
to do all this crap.
She’s brilliant, extremely hard working, incredibly talented, innovative, and I tell my husband all the time, I think she’s a gorgeous woman, as well. And we all know she has better values than this.
I don’t believe that the ends justifies the means. That’s Bush-Cheney-Rove thinking, and Democrats should be better than such cynical dishonesty.
With her impressive successes last night, I think she earned her way onto
the Democratic presidential ticket. But my guess is that as vice
president, since it’s almost impossible for her to win on delegate count.
But I never count the Clintons out. Never.
Thank you for your comment!