Hillary's Choice

Hillary is going to loose tommorrow.  It is not certain by how much, but it looks like somewhere between 7-to-15%.

She is going to go on loosing.  In Nevada, Hillary's lead in the polls will melt faster than a New Hampshire snow ball under the desert sun. She will be crushed in SC by a wave of hope among the AA community.

Basiscally, she faces a month of being pumelled in the press and watching the Obama sunami build. If she wants to win, she has to break his momentum. According to conventional thinking, the only way she can do so is to attack Obama relentlessly:

She tried the "experince" frame in Iowa and that didn't work.  

She is trying an "all talk, and no walk" frame in NH, and that isn't going to work either.  

Of the top three Dems, Obama has by far the most congruence between his life choices, rhetoric, and voting record.  There are some minor inconsistencies, a few scraps of hypocracy, a few changed positions, but according to polls and focus groups, Obama comes across to most voters as the most authentic and the most honest of the top Dems.

Attacks, particularly in a primary, come at a cost. The more Hillary attacks, the more she confirms the meme of her "unlikability" and her "ambition."

Furthermore, Hillary faces a basic structural problem that may be unfixable:  she is primarily a restoration candidate in an election that is overwhelmingly about change.  She muddies her own message when she tries to embrace change.  

All of this suggsts to me that HRC has three choices:

Option #1) She can go after Obama with everything she has got.  She can use surrogates to attack; 527 to shovel the dirt; continue to step up leaked oppo research to the press. In short, empty the arsenal.  Will it work?  I don't think so.  At the very best she might win a war of attrition by stealing Michigan and Florida and depending on Superdelegates.  She would probably have to pull out a win in California and that seems unlikely as Obama's wave continues to build. It would result in a deeply and bitterly divided party.  If as I suspect, she would loose anyway, she is going to do serious damage to her standing in the Senate, and to the Clinton legacy.

Option #2) She can decide to stay in the race, but throw out the conventional playbook and swear-off any additional non-policy attacks.  This just might work, or at least it has as good of chance of working as the Rovian model above.  At least it would get the conversation back on to policy, which is HRC's strength, and off of her personality and style which are a real problem.  It also would help keep the party united and help her standing and future in the Senate.

Option #3) She can bow out gracefully and announce that she intends to do everything she can to help Obama and to work for change in the Senate.  She will get tons of kudos for placing the party ahead of her own ambition, and perhaps position herself to become Majority leader in the Senate.

If I were betting, I would guess that Hillary will choose Option #1.  She has nursed her ambition for too long to let go.  Her staff and advisors are almost all advocates of "old school hardball."  This is the game they know, and this is what they will fall back on in times of trouble.

I hope I am wrong.  I hope that somewhere someone can convince Bill and Hillary to consider their future in the party and the well being of the party and the country.



Display:


Re: Hillary's Choice (2.00 / 1)

I guess, yeah, it's a good idea for everyone to drop out the moment one of the other candidates has a good week.

Certainly it's impossible for momentum to shift twice during the course of a presidential campaign.  Never happened before.  It is inconceivable that Obama's poll numbers could ever go any direction but up from here.

In other news, the Obama triumphalism has officially reached critical mass.  If you were all so convinced that no other outcome is possible, you wouldn't all be begging so hard for Hillary to drop out now.  Ease back on the throttle a little bit, your entreaties to "surrender to my candidate for the good of the party" are not even close to sincere.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:22:34 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

This Obama supporter, at the very least, is well aware that the race is far from over.  And I don't begrudge Clinton in the least for continuing to fight through February 5th at the least.  She and her campaign have worked really hard to come this far.  Besides, I think it's probably good for the party to have a thorough primary thar requires whoever wins to really work for it.  Coronations are rarely good in politics, even if they sound appealing at the time.  


by HSTruman on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:28:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Clinton isn't going anywhere until at least after February 5th. If Obama stumbles, and he very well might, she's still in a good position to capitalize on that.

What I'm really interested in is what Edwards is doing--can't say I really understand what he's up to. Maybe he has nothing better to do than run for President?  


by Korha on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

If/When the Clinton-Obama war goes nuclear, Edwards is well-positioned to pick up the disaffected partisans from either side.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:36:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Do you really think he has a realistic chance?  

Sorry, but I don't see any path to the nomination for JE.  I think he is hoping Clinton completely implodes, so that he can offer himself as an alternative change candidate.

Given that she is the one with the money and the organization that seems extremely low odds.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:44:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I think he has a path if things get dirty.  He has the resources to compete, and if Obama and Clinton both come out of their battle smelling like shit, Mr. Clean himself will be there as an option.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:52:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I think you misread my post.  I want her to think about how she wants to continue.

Does she want to follow the conventional wisdom, or is she willing to try something different.

IMHO, you responded to your own frustration rather than my post.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:41:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Who put this line at the end of your post?

I hope that somewhere someone can convince Bill and Hillary to consider their future in the party and the well being of the party and the country.

You're not saying that dropping out would be better for the party and the country?  Really?

I don't know who you think you're kidding.  Nor do I see how anyone could argue with my description of this post as "triumphalism," because that's exactly what it is.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:46:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I laid out Option #2:  she stays to fight, but decides to fight fair.

This is not intended as "triumphalism."  It is intended as a reasonable discussion about the well being of the party.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Bull.

Do you call for Obama or Edwards to fight fair? no. In fact your definition of fighting fair would make it impossible to win for any candidate doing it. It's a false choice. Especially as seeing how you describe option 3.

...bow out gracefully...
...do everything she can to help Obama...
...placing the party ahead of her own ambition...

How on earth is anointing a single candidate at the beginning of the race anything but robbing people of their vote? How is that healthy for our party and democracy? And why not Edwards?

No this is sheer unadulterated Obama triumphalism. It's all based that whatever is good for Obama is good for the party. And yes that is extremely arrogant.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Ernst on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 10:18:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I think Obama has been fighting fair.

And unless I am badly mistaken, he is also winning.

I am only asking that Hillary play by the same rules, for the good of the party.

No more Rovian bullshit.  If you want change, stop acting like Republicans.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 10:46:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

yeah spin some more...

Obama, Clinton and Edwards have all behaved rather similar. And you don't ask Hillary to play bu the same rules, you asked her to drop out or to behave within certain limits that neither Edwards or Obama accept. You'd better learn what Rovian bullshit actually  means before you toss it around or you'll be unpleasantly surprised in the general.

After all those comment how "it is supposed to be election not a coronation" about half of you can't wait long enough to ditch all that to crown him. If this is the future of the democratic party we're screwed. This concern trolling of Obama supporters after a single primary is despicable.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Ernst on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 11:06:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I think you are responding more to your own frustration than to my post.

Clinton has been far more negative towards Obama than Obama has been towards her.  If you disagree, I can only conclude that you haven't been paying attention or you are blinded by your attachment to your candidate.

My point is that it is fine for HRC to fight on, but she should not do so in a way that will damage the party or her own career and legacy.  Why do you find that so objectionable?


by upper left on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:57:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Nope. Biden dropped out after Iowa and I haven't settled on a new candidate yet, My support will mainly depend on my agreement with their overall foreign policy agenda. Which means that Obama is actually a top contender for me.

And I've been paying attention quite a bit and probably for longer then you have. Clinton has received personal and unfounded attacks as well, The Punjab memo the accusation that she sold the Lincoln bedroom and much more.

My problem with your point is not only is it hypocritical to single out a single candidate but that your actual recommendation result in the opposite. Following them will damage her own career, legacy and the party as well.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Ernst on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 10:36:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

My point is that Option #1, going "nuclear," is going to give Hillary, the party, and the country, a radioactive mess to clean up.  

I would be thrilled if they chose either Option 2 or Option 3.  


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 04:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I think it's a good analysis of her options, though.  And you're probably right she will go with door #1.  I wish she would choose #2 but I don't think she has the staff to do that effectively.  She would need to completely revamp her campaign.  If she basically backed away from Nevada and SC I guess she might have the time to do that.  But just barely.


by Piuma on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:27:53 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Thanks for actually responding to the substance of what I wrote.  I think a few tempers are a bit short around here.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:46:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

And understandably so.  We should take that into account.  I know many others do not act that way, but still we should try.


by Piuma on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:50:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

I know one thing, if she just became herself, fired most of the pollsters & strategists, stopped all negative ads and most of the mushy ones, sent Bill on a long fact-finding mission to the South Pole and talked about a new idea or two people would have a lot more respect for her and she would drop out as a Titan of the Senate rather than a rejected politician.


by howardpark on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:34:10 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

This is my point entirely.  I have respect for the intelligence and perseverence of both the Clinton's.  I hope they will think about their legacy, and about the well being of the party and the country.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:56:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

You will switch parties of Obama is the Democratic nominee?  Hope you won't be needing an abortion any time in the next 20 years!


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:35:47 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

So where are you going?

And, why so hostile to Obama?


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 03:47:48 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Where do you see her winning.  It appears that her lead in the national polls has already largely melted.  It is not hard to project that she will be down by double digits nationally by Feb 5.


by upper left on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 04:02:24 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

She should throw it all on the table. Fire Mark Penn and let us know what she really thinks.


by dmc2 on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 05:19:26 PM EST

Re: Hillary's Choice (none / 0)

Fight until the bloody end. Obama ninjas complained that this was a coronation of Hillary, now she should just fold after one bad week. I guess a coronation is OK, as long as it is with your candidate.Give me a break. I will fight against Dr. Hope and Dr. Change right until the final vote of the DNC.


by moi moi on Mon Jan 07, 2008 at 11:10:22 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.