No doubt about it, the cutest reptile on our planet is the chameleon. And when it comes to US presidential candidates there are a lot of chameleons but none holds a candle to Hillary Obama, formerly known as Hillary Clinton. She decided she'd rather look more like Barak Obama than Bill Clinton after Barak Obama handed her an upset in the Iowa primaries.
Hillary Clinton's narrative is muddled and confusing. She bobs and weaves, doing whatever she deems necessary to preserve her claim that she's the best Demutante to take on the Repuglican champion in November. But an op-ed piece by former Democratic consultant Frances Wilkinson in the New York Times questions whether Hillary isn't "Fighting to Lose":
"For more than a year, Mrs. Clinton has based her campaign in large part on her ability to parry the kind of attack politics that Democrats feared from the Republican Party under its former chief strategist, Karl Rove. On the trail, Mrs. Clinton has assured voters that she is the only Democratic candidate who has been “vetted” and shown capable of withstanding the right-wing attack machine. But that machine has grown curiously quiet of late.
In the Republican races in Iowa and New Hampshire, the harsh partisan noise of the past two decades grew faint. Mrs. Clinton may be entrenched behind a political Maginot line, preparing to defeat an opponent who is contemplating a new, more daring maneuver for victory.
Republican candidates with a mean streak are fading fast. Mitt Romney, the only candidate to use the word “internship” in a political statement about Mrs. Clinton, is in trouble. Rudy Giuliani has embraced the most anti-Democratic rhetoric of any of the Republicans but has collected few votes.
By contrast, when Mike Huckabee mounted the stage in Des Moines to claim victory in the Iowa Republican caucuses, he offered no red meat. After securing victory by the votes of a bloc formerly known as the “religious right,” Mr. Huckabee demonized no Democrats or liberals or gays. Instead, he quoted G. K. Chesterton on love.
Then on Tuesday, John McCain seized victory in the Republican primary in New Hampshire after a campaign essentially devoid of attacks on Democrats. A signature moment was Mr. McCain’s lengthy, thoughtful and entirely civil discussion with a war protester at one of his campaign events.
Mr. McCain, an expert on military policy, didn’t make a cheap example of the civilian. Instead, he practically made a political convert. The exchange ended with the protester wishing Mr. McCain success in his race against Mitt Romney. On election night, the victorious Mr. McCain saluted the Democratic candidates as well as his Republican foes
If Mr. Huckabee and Mr. McCain continue to set the tone for the Republican side, Mrs. Clinton would find it hard to escape the partisan past she unwillingly symbolizes. Her negative poll ratings are consistently higher than those of any candidate running for president. They seem more unyielding as well.
Given that the Republican base has shrunk since 2004, it makes strategic sense for the party’s candidates to be campaigning in an expansive mood. This new Republican style is not a matter only for the general election, however. As partisan battle recedes, the role of the warrior in both parties is diminished. Thus, Democratic primary voters may find Mr. Obama’s claim to post-partisanship to be perceptive rather than naïve.
Republicans seem as exhausted by the Bush years as Democrats are. If this fragile moment endures, the next president will be the candidate whose person and politics make the sturdiest bridge across America’s political divide. Hillary Clinton is solid enough to bear the traffic. But how far can she stretch?
Hillary Clinton's narrative is muddled and confusing. She bobs and weaves, doing whatever she deems necessary to preserve her claim that she's the best Demutante to take on the Repuglican champion in November. But an op-ed piece by former Democratic consultant Frances Wilkinson in the New York Times questions whether Hillary isn't "Fighting to Lose":
"For more than a year, Mrs. Clinton has based her campaign in large part on her ability to parry the kind of attack politics that Democrats feared from the Republican Party under its former chief strategist, Karl Rove. On the trail, Mrs. Clinton has assured voters that she is the only Democratic candidate who has been “vetted” and shown capable of withstanding the right-wing attack machine. But that machine has grown curiously quiet of late.
In the Republican races in Iowa and New Hampshire, the harsh partisan noise of the past two decades grew faint. Mrs. Clinton may be entrenched behind a political Maginot line, preparing to defeat an opponent who is contemplating a new, more daring maneuver for victory.
Republican candidates with a mean streak are fading fast. Mitt Romney, the only candidate to use the word “internship” in a political statement about Mrs. Clinton, is in trouble. Rudy Giuliani has embraced the most anti-Democratic rhetoric of any of the Republicans but has collected few votes.
By contrast, when Mike Huckabee mounted the stage in Des Moines to claim victory in the Iowa Republican caucuses, he offered no red meat. After securing victory by the votes of a bloc formerly known as the “religious right,” Mr. Huckabee demonized no Democrats or liberals or gays. Instead, he quoted G. K. Chesterton on love.
Then on Tuesday, John McCain seized victory in the Republican primary in New Hampshire after a campaign essentially devoid of attacks on Democrats. A signature moment was Mr. McCain’s lengthy, thoughtful and entirely civil discussion with a war protester at one of his campaign events.
Mr. McCain, an expert on military policy, didn’t make a cheap example of the civilian. Instead, he practically made a political convert. The exchange ended with the protester wishing Mr. McCain success in his race against Mitt Romney. On election night, the victorious Mr. McCain saluted the Democratic candidates as well as his Republican foes
If Mr. Huckabee and Mr. McCain continue to set the tone for the Republican side, Mrs. Clinton would find it hard to escape the partisan past she unwillingly symbolizes. Her negative poll ratings are consistently higher than those of any candidate running for president. They seem more unyielding as well.
Given that the Republican base has shrunk since 2004, it makes strategic sense for the party’s candidates to be campaigning in an expansive mood. This new Republican style is not a matter only for the general election, however. As partisan battle recedes, the role of the warrior in both parties is diminished. Thus, Democratic primary voters may find Mr. Obama’s claim to post-partisanship to be perceptive rather than naïve.
Republicans seem as exhausted by the Bush years as Democrats are. If this fragile moment endures, the next president will be the candidate whose person and politics make the sturdiest bridge across America’s political divide. Hillary Clinton is solid enough to bear the traffic. But how far can she stretch?
amazing
ReplyDeletevideo