Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
A Classy Campaign
Mayhill Fowler, whose report sparked the 'bitter small towns' controversy, describes the Barack Obama campaign as 'classy.' She's right. But think about that. If there's one thing the Clinton campaign is not, it's classy.
And that's very odd, because classy would have worked for Hillary Clinton so much better, don't you think? When she was asked if she thought that Obama was a Muslim, she hemmed and hawed around it. Well, she didn't think he was a Muslim, but of course she couldn't really say for sure (wink, wink).
She couldn't bring herself to be classy, to say, "That's completely ridiculous! It's just a perfect example of the kinds of lies we've come to expect from the far right. Barack Obama is no more a Muslim than I am!" But why not? Why didn't she say that? To be completely cynical about it, the rumors wouldn't have gone away, just because she denied them. I'm convinced that this kind of reply would have given her campaign a much bigger boost than her mealy-mouthed equivocating. 'Classy' would have worked for her, but apparently that's just not in her nature.
Likewise, she jumped on the Rev. Wright controversy like a Karl Rove Republican. Hey, the excerpts from Wright's sermons were bad enough for her purposes. They were getting plenty of play - especially on Fox - and the Republicans were howling for blood. So why didn't she go for the high road, speaking out about understanding the black experience and about how a person should not be judged by two or three phrases from a lifetime of sermons and good works. As a purely political move, sticking up for Barack Obama would have helped her own campaign much more than his. As a practical matter, 'classy' would have worked best. But it was not her choice.
We've seen this over and over again. The latest example is this 'bitter' garbage. This time, Clinton is not just following the Republican playbook, but actually appears to be coordinating her comments with John McCain. Note that Obama's comments received plenty of press, right from the start, and the Republicans certainly made a big deal about it. So wouldn't Clinton have looked much better if she'd supported Barack Obama's point, rather than pick out a few words from the speech (bitter, guns, religion) and hammer them like a lying Swift Boat veteran?
Time and time again, we've seen Hillary Clinton taking the low road - the lowest of low roads - when I'm convinced that the high road would have helped her campaign much more. She's widely thought to be cynical, manipulative, scheming, untrustworthy, and untruthful, and these would have been perfect opportunities to demonstrate the opposite. But she just couldn't bring herself to be classy. Maybe it didn't even occur to her as an option, I don't know.
Last year, I would have been happy enough with either candidate, though I worried that Hillary's negatives were frighteningly high. I'd never understood the virulent hatred for Hillary Clinton. It seemed to be just pathological. I always stood up for her, throughout the Clinton presidency and afterwards.
But I guess she's shown me that I was wrong. So far this year, whenever she's had the chance to do something right AND to help her own campaign, she chose the politics of fear and divisiveness even when classy would have worked better! She may no longer be a Goldwater Girl, but her instincts are still with the Republicans, it seems. She and Karl Rove have formed a mutual admiration society - they're technically on opposite sides, but they both play the game in the same way. And she's even schmoozing up to the 'vast right-wing conspiracy.'
Why couldn't the Clintons - either of them, this year - go with classy? It's got to be a personality flaw,... or perhaps just too much time spent in the poisonous atmosphere of Washington. (Bill Clinton, in particular, just seems furious all the time. Hey, I've been furious for seven years! Where's he been?) As I say, I'm convinced this would have actually helped her campaign - really helped it, too. Tell me I'm wrong.
As it is, I guess I understand the Hillary-haters much better. Maybe they were more perceptive than I. Maybe they saw something I'd been missing all those years... Nah! They're just lunatics who got it right for once. But Hillary Clinton has convinced me that she's not suited for the presidency, not at all. She's demonstrated her true nature this year, and it isn't pretty.
Comments (4)
Amen to all this. Well said.
April 16, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I remember my reaction at the close of the february debate when Clinton said she was "proud to share the stage" with Obama. She seemed sincere. I believed she really meant it - and I was proud too - of her and of the party that had produced two historic presidential contenders. My growing dislike of her and her fratricidal campaign just melted away and I wondered why we hadn't seen more moments like that one from her previously.
But a few days later we had a new death spiral of trumped up and misleading negative campaigning. 3am. Nafta. etc.
I think the Clintons endured so many years of unfair and almost pathological hatred directed at them that they have developed a bunker mentality. I despise their campaign tactics but I am also secretly sad and embarrased for them.
April 16, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
When this campaign season began I was almost giddy. For the first time in years, I felt we were actually spoiled for choice. There was something about each candidate that I liked and took my time deciding on who to back. As a 53 year old feminist (who is still hoping to see a woman president before I die) I had a lot of respect for Senator Clinton. My only concerns over her candidacy were 1: I wasn't keen on the idea of Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton, and 2: There is an almost pathological hatred of her out there among a lot of people and the Right would certainly use that to whip up the base and get out the vote. But those concerns were minor and I would have gladly rallied behind her if she won the nomination.
Now, however, like so many others on these posts, I'm beginning to wonder if I could vote for her at all. I think she really did assume this nomination was hers for the taking, and didn't expect it to be so close between her and ANYONE else. She was caught completely off guard, and how she's handled herself and her campaign,now that she actually has to fight for the nomination, has been really ugly. Some may see fighting ugly as an advantage in the GE, but I truly believe she is harming our party with her pettiness, her pandering, and her faux outrage. It doesn't matter to me whether I find her likeable or not, but I don't trust her.
I'll never vote for McCain and if, by some chance, she does become the nominee I will vote for her. But, boy, after such a promising beginning to this primary race to have to go in and vote for the lesser of two evils (AGAIN) just breaks my heart.
April 16, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with everything you said.
Events test the mettle of a candidate and of course, a president. She may be battle worn from all the years of attacks, but frankly it's no excuse if you want to be the leader of the free world. You rise above it, you show your greatness and your grace under pressure. I remember after 9/11, hoping that Bush would pass the kind of test that FDR and Lincoln passed, and became more than their resumes said they would be. But he failed.
And I'm sorry to say, Hillary has failed this most important test. She has not risen above one single, solitary issue to look to the good of the party, the country, or even the good in herself. She has used every possible issue to be petty and cheap and classless and cruel. As you said, even when the opposite would have done her much good. Even if she tries to look classy tonight, who will believe it? The last time she did it in a debate, within days she was yelling "shame on you" at Obama over his assertion about her NAFTA positions which -- in case anyone has forgotten -- turned out to be true.
We can only conclude that she will be the same if she became president. She will look for the political answer, look to how she can exploit a situation. She will not rise to greatness when tested. She has not been able to do it as a candidate. And that is why we know what we need to know about the kind of president she will be. She is unfit and unworthy.
And I too, defended the Clintons for years. It makes me sad.
April 16, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment