Archives for 2008

Much maligned Maureen Down, listening to the voices in her head the other day:

“Mr. President, I’m going to run a very transparent administration, everything on C-Span. So I’ll need a full accounting of your foundation donors.”

“Oh, sure thing, buddy, from this day forward.”

“No, Bill, we’ll need full disclosure of your business dealings for the last eight years. And you can no longer accept Arab millions — not if I’m going to talk tough to them about oil. I can’t send Hillary on diplomatic missions to the Middle East if you’re taking money from Dubai and Kuwait. And no more trips to Kazakhstan. I wouldn’t want to have to put a Geiger-counter bracelet on you to check that you’re not involved in another shady uranium deal.”

“Ha, ha.”

“We need to know where that $11 million came from that you guys loaned your campaign. And the $15 million from Ron Burkle at Yucaipa and the $3 million from Vinod Gupta. And you must spill about any offshore accounts in the Caymans. And no more big-money speeches, Bill. You guys have already cashed in for more than $100 million.”

***

“You know, Barack, the more I’m seein’ what you’ve got in mind for me, the more I’m worryin’ that Hillary’s just not cut out for this job. You don’t want her glomming on to everythin’. Since she’s almost even with the delegates, she’ll want to go halfsies in the government. She’ll want to run foreign policy, cause you know nothin’ about that. And legal stuff, because you never practiced real law. And economic policy, ’cause she connected better with working-class voters. And everything to do with white people, of course. I’ve got to level with you, man. Hillary’s a lot of work. And that Kathleen Sebelius is terrific and has those twinkly eyes.”

The WSJ:

Supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton suggested she would like to be Sen. Barack Obama’s running mate, but close advisers to Sen. Obama are signaling that an Obama-Clinton ticket is highly unlikely.

Some in the Clinton camp also noted a possible deal-breaker for a party-unity ticket: Bill Clinton may balk at releasing records of his business dealings and big donors to his presidential library.

Discuss.

A Point for MoDo?Post + Comments (49)

Appearances of the word “I,” “I’ve,” “I’ll,” or “me” in Clinton’s speech: 90 out of 2237 words.

Appearances of the word “I,” “I’ve,” “I’ll,” or “me” in Obama’s speech (me appeared once): 25 out of 2451 words

Appearances of the word “we” in Hillary’s final speech: 17 out of 2237 words.

Appearances of the word “we” in Obama’s final speech: 36 out of 2451 words.

I think a lot can be learned about the difference between the two campaigns by observing the simple difference in style, and while Bobby Jindal and McCain and others chuck out claims that Obama is substance free and just a good speaker, it is important to recognize that words matter (although I can’t believe we still have to debate this after the fateful inclusion of the phrase “axis of evil” in Bush’s speech years ago). There is a deep difference in the rhetoric from Obama and Clinton the other night, and I would argue it is emblematic of the difference between the two campaigns and their approaches.

I don’t want to go too deep in the psycho-babble, but I think it is not an unreasonable claim to state that many people who found themselves to be die-hard Clinton supporters identified personally with Clinton. For many of the feminists and older women who made up Hillary’s unwavering core of support, a rejection of Hillary was a rejection of themselves- they saw Hillary being subjected to the kind of abuse that they themselves have suffered, they identified with the concept of the glass ceiling and identified with much of the real and perceived sexism. In many cases, they saw things that I simply would not see (not that example, as even I could pick out what was offensive there, but check the whole archives and surely you will see some things you did not pick up), because of who they are and what they personally have experienced. In short, when Hillary lost, or they listened to some jackass on CNN debate whether it was appropriate to call Hillary a bitch, it was a personal loss or as if they had personally been called a bitch. When some idiot with a website named Balloon Juice said something nasty about Hillary, it was perceived as an attack on them. When the nonsense about Obama flipping off Hillary surfaced, it was perceived as yet another slight against the individual Clinton supporter- “He flipped me off!”

For Obama, many of the supporters identify with a movement, a need for something different, a need for change, and a sense of community. The Obama campaign recognized this difference, and masterfully used social networking to build a vibrant community. When Clinton made her fateful “white people” or “RFK assassination” remarks, it was an outright breach of community and societal norms (the latter RFK comments striking a nerve because this was a long-held fear of the community), which would help to explain why Obama supporters recoiled in horror at the remarks. When Republicans tried the hackneyed old “appeaser” nonsense, it was like the folks in the community who opposed the war in 2003 and beyond were being called traitors or in league with the terrorists again. When Hillary seized upon the “bitter” remarks for political advantage, it was as if the entire community was under assault for being “elitist.”

The question before us is how to merge the two campaigns and their supporters to beat McCain, but I would argue that while right now, tensions are hot, the fact that the Obama campaign has in large part been fueled by a movement mentality, there is a distinct possibility that it will be easy to quickly assimilate many of the Clinton supporters (and I dislike the negative connotations of the word assimilate, but I am hard-pressed to come up with another word). A piece I read yesterday discussed just that starting to happen:

Clinton supporters find evening filled with graciousness

The whole evening had been filled with similar graciousness and kindness, Stevenson said.

She had arrived at the building with Humphrey, and as they were taken to their seats, people kept stopping to hug them and thank them for being there.

Laughing, she spoke of how she decided she needed to make a trip to the restroom before Obama’s speech. Again, people kept stopping her to shake her hand.

“Finally, I just had to wave and leave or I would have missed the speech,” she said.

All of the other Clinton supporters received similar treatment.

In his speech, Obama had so many kind things to say about Clinton that her supporters often found themselves on their feet, applauding with the nearly 20,000 Obama zealots inside the arena.

It won’t be easy, and it is going to take some time, but Hillary has already signaled that she is going to ramp down things on Saturday at an event for her and her supporters. She started to do that yesterday with her glowing and admirable remarks in front of AIPAC, and for now, at least, it would be smart to simply let Clinton and her supporters have some space. They are hurting, and when you factor in that for years people had just assumed Clinton would be the next President, this is an especially tough loss. Even though I don’t identify as personally with Obama as many Clinton supporters do with Clinton, I know I would need some time had things gone the other way.

As a closing thought, this was just something I tossed around in my head last night while trying to fall asleep. Of course this does not apply to every person in either camp, but for the purposes of my amateur analysis, you have to break people into groups. As to how accurate the assessment is, I don’t know- you tell me. It is quite possible that those on the other side may view things just the opposite- it is the Obama supporters who identify with the candidate (Obamessiah is not an unfamiliar term to you all by now), and the reverse of what I am stating is more accurate. I think, however, that if someone were to perform a rhetorical analysis of the major speeches by the two candidates (something I have not done- I just counted a few words), I would bet there is some evidence there for my conjecture.

Compare SpeechesPost + Comments (138)

She is going to hold an event on Saturday to announce her strong support for Senator Obama’s presidential bid:

On Saturday, I will extend my congratulations to Senator Obama and my support for his candidacy,” the New York senator and former first lady said in a letter to her backers released early on Thursday morning.

“I have said throughout the campaign that I would strongly support Senator Obama if he were the Democratic Party’s nominee, and I intend to deliver on that promise.” […]

“This has been a long and hard-fought campaign, but as I have always said, my differences with Senator Obama are small compared to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans,” she said in the letter.

“I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise.”

Clearly, this is a concession and Clinton is now ready to move forward. We’ve all given the Clintons a very rough time here over the past couple months – so much so that we could, at times “no longer rationally discuss” it. Fair enough. Her camp has aggravated us. At the same time, I really kind of feel for her. For years, it has been assumed that Hillary Clinton would be the first woman president of the United States. It was also assumed, rightly or wrongly, that this would happen this year, and I have no doubt that was in her plans (and those of the Democratic Party) all along. At the beginning of this campaign, nearly all of us assumed she would be the nominee until this phenomena named Barack Obama joined the race.

So while I didn’t like it, I can completely understand how Hillary wanted to go right till the end, making every argument she could, even when to the rest of us it seemed irrational. It was her dream job and she was going to make history. But someone else comes along who’s going to get that dream job and is also going to make history. It’s got to be quite a kick in the stomach. Think about it: You apply for the job of a lifetime. You know you’re going to get it because there is no competition. You psych yourself up, knowing the job is yours and the interview process is merely a formality. All of a sudden, a new candidate for the job comes along and becomes the favorite with the recruiting manager.

That’s really got to suck, and you need time to come to grips with it. From a purely emotional perspective, it can also be very embarrassing to go from near certain victory to having to concede to someone who was a long shot has only been around a short time.

I’m not saying Clinton has been right in her actions. I’m just saying that, upon reflection, I can understand where she’s coming from and why it has taken her so long to admit to herself that she’s not going to get a job that she was clearly the favorite to get. Personally, I want to look forward now, and forget about the squabbling of the past several months. I hope that Clinton’s promise to support Barack Obama 100% is sincere and that she does everything possible to get her very disappointed supporters to do the same. I hope that Clinton supporters like Jeralyn, BTD and Taylor Marsh follow her lead, knowing that their candidate lost fairly and that electing a Democrat has to be the goal. For all the fault they find with him, Obama will be an infinitely better president than the alternative.

Finally, I hope Barack Obama supporters will focus more on electing him that they do on what’s happened in the past. We’ll accomplish more by bringing the Clinton supporters into the fold – sort of a post-primary “Marshall Plan” – than we will by rubbing defeat in their faces.

It’s the only way we’ll defeat John McCain in November.

A Note About ClintonPost + Comments (106)