Last debate of the season - what Hillary must do

Posted December 13, 2007 - 12:00am by Expat Teacher

At 1 o'clock this afternoon, the Des Moines Register is hosting the final Democratic debate prior to Iowa (thank the Lord!) and most media accounts have the Clinton campaign in disarray as their strategy has fallen apart.

Let's review the Clinton strategy. Twin pillars. The first is that she is unshakable and the second is that her nomination is inevitable.

With her screw up a month ago over driver's licenses for illegals, she appeared shaken for the first time. Obama was able to capitalize on it and close the gap in both Iowa and New Hampshire. Now, Clinton looks anything but inevitable. Both pillars are crumbling and, because Hillary has always been campaigning as a general election candidate, she has little foundation to keep the campaign from falling in on itself.

And that's where we pick up the story prior to today's debate. Hillary enters the Des Moines Register debate as a challenger and not as the front-runner. That torch was passed to Obama this last weekend. What must she do to regain front-runner status and re-establish her twin pillars?

First, she must come out hard against Obama. She can't be grossly negative, because that plays into Obama's framing of the "old divisiveness vs. fresh start" election. However, Clinton will only establish her twin pillars if she can reassure voters that she can't be shaken. She must show that the recent Obama upsurge hasn't shaken her campaign or caused her any trouble. She's got to give as good as she has gotten lately.

Democratic voters are ravenous for a White House victory. They won't vote for anyone that doesn't look like a real fighter up there. If Hillary isn't taking the fight to Obama, she'll look shaken. Without re-establishing her unshakenness, she'll never be able to re-establish her inevitable pillar. With 21 days left during the holiday season, this is Clinton's last chance to salvage her presidential bid. Watch and let me know if Hillary did enough to keep herself in the game.

In case you think I'm a Hillary apologist, rest assured I'm not. Even though President Clinton basically said everything that went well in his presidency was Hillary's doing and everything that failed was his, I'm not buying. Hillary has had two major decisions in her public career and she got them both wrong. I'm not sold on a Hillary presidency, that's why I'm going to be watching to see if Hillary is able to show that she really is a fighter.

Trackback URL for this post:

http://www.goodwillhinton.com/trackback/633

Comments

Score one for Richardson

by Alaskan Brian - 12/13/2007 - 7:02pm

Expat, while I am a conservative that most often votes for the Republican candidate, I am starting to understand what you see in Gov. Richardson. While I did not watch the debate, an AP article that I just read said the following:

Only Richardson said balancing the budget would be a high priority. He noted that as governor in New Mexico, he is required to do so, and he called for a presidential line-item veto, a constitutional amendment to balance the budget, the elimination of "corporate welfare" and elimination of congressional earmarks to help get rid of federal red ink.

Hmmm...he sounds almost like a conservative. :)

If the wrong Republican won the nomination and Richardson somehow pulled off a miracle win in the Democratic primaries, I could see myself considering a vote for him.

n/a

Richardson pleases the left and the right

by Expat Teacher - 12/14/2007 - 9:59am

Interesting you should say that. I was trying to find the exact percentage of Republicans in New Mexico that voted for him in 2006. I think he had something like 40% of the Republican votes. He won reelection with 70% of the votes.

In today's Google Alerts, I found two articles that further reinforce this idea that Bill Richardson can truly bring the left and the right together.

First, an apparent conservative, Dan Calabrese, wrote that while no Democratic president is to his liking, Richardson is the best of the bunch.

Richardson is the kind of candidate conservatives would mention if asked, if you had to live with a Democratic president, who would you prefer it to be? The right way to answer that question is not to try to choose the least liberal. Any Democratic president is going to be a liberal president. If you had to live with a Democratic president, you’d want someone who is at least a grown up. Someone who understands how to make decisions. Someone who understands how the federal government works. Someone who has had to run something – like a state – where he was judged by his ability to preside over a growing, job-creating economy.

Someone like Bill Richardson. He would certainly not be a good president in the context of a conservative’s vision for the country, but he could be trusted to make responsible day-to-day decisions, and his North Korea follies notwithstanding, would probably not display the combination of inexperience and impetuousness that could put America’s national security at risk.

And on the left, Deborah White of About's US Liberal Politics Blog explains why she supports Bill Richardson for POTUS. She likes all the candidates, but says

My top two preferences are Barack Obama and Bill Richardson.

If casting my ballot on January 3, 2008 at the Iowa caucus, I would vote for Bill Richardson for two reasons:

Gov. Richardson's decades-long experience and great success as a diplomat, a member of Congress, as Energy Secretary and U.N. Ambassador under President Clinton, and as a governor who has balanced a budget, and solved education and health care crises.

Unanswered questions and lingering suspicions about Sen. Obama's health care proposals, as eloquently analyzed by respected progressive Princeton University economist Paul Krugman in his New York Times column.

If Barack Obama responds with clarity, transparency and honesty to the legitimate questions raised by Professor Krugman about this vital issue, I may still switch my vote to the senator from Illinois.

Barring that, I will vote for Bill Richardson. And if asked, I would urge my readers to do the same.

I know everyone thinks I'm crazy, but as voters begin to pay attention and the "inevitable Hillary" veneer starts to wear thin, Governor Richardson will pick up votes.

Folks should be ready for a Richardson v. Huckabee general election fight.

Yep...

by Encyclopedia Brown - 12/16/2007 - 10:01pm

I think you're crazy. :)

Or at least you should offer an official disclaimer due to your work with the Richardson campaign. This a three-way race with Edwards as the longshot. Fair or not, Richardson has no chance. He just doesn't. If he placed 4th in Iowa and New Hampshire, how is credibly going to rally money and support for Super Tuesday? Even if he grabs third, there would be so much momentum toward whoever was winning--Clinton or Obama, that a serious challenge would not be likely.
Besides, I think Richardson at this point is angling for VP.

If the Democrats want a clean break from the past, if they want to put the Clinton Machine to bed, if they want someone who has a legitimate shot at unifying Democrats, Independents and Republicans, then they should go with Barack Obama.

n/a

I have offered a disclaimer before, but the search function

by Expat Teacher - 12/17/2007 - 1:56am

on GWH isn't working. It won't find "Expat Teacher" or "Bill Richardson".

So, yeah, I'm working for Richardson as a volunteer.

And you are right that Obama brings change, but it is hardly progressive. A health care policy that doesn't cover everyone? A climate policy that won't reduce emissions to 1990 levels? No commitment to leave Iraq? What sort of change are we getting exactly?

Additionally, Obama hasn't been through the ringer of the Right Wing Attack machine. How will he fair?

Or even more strategically, what states does Obama bring to the Democratic electoral college?

And considering what I wrote above, Richardson is able to bring left, right and center together. Obama doesn't have any history of doing that and there is little evidence that he can bring all 3 together.

p.s. Richardson isn't angling for the VP. He's offered categorical denials multiple times.

If you want to know what the VP selections will likely be for Hillary and Obama, Hillary's camp has already made overtures to Ted Strickland, Governor of Ohio. Obama's camp has been more reserved, but rumor has it that a southern, white guy like Mike Easley, Governor of North Carolina would be perfect for the ticket. Others have implied maybe a Joe Biden might be a possibility to overcome concerns about Obama's international levity.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.