Hillary Clinton’s Post-Iowa Caucus Political Dilemma
In the wake of what her most loyal backers and most imaginative spinners can only call a massive defeat, New York Senator Hillary Clinton now faces a dilemma not faced by any Democrat who has come before her.
It’s best summarized by the New York Post’s Washington D.C. bureau chief Charles Hurt:
It’s certainly conceivable that Clinton can go on to stage a dramatic comeback in New Hampshire just as her husband did in 1992, forever billing him the “Comeback Kid.” She maintains a solid lead there.
But the same dynamics that worked in Iowa are now at work in New Hampshire.
Carrying high the flag of “change,” Obama will again attract all those people who are just sick and tired everybody in Washington. Add to the mix that Clinton goes there as a fallen star and Obama goes there as a rock star.
The problem with caressing the jewels of the crown before the coronation is that it’s really embarrassing when it turns out that the coronation goes to someone else.
Clinton’s invincibility has turned into inadequacy. She stumbled from Almighty to also-ran.
The only question that remains now is whether she will be able to recover enough to go on.
But does she really want to spend the rest of her viable political career on the national stage tearing down the man who is poised to become America’s real first black president?
Just look at some of her options. She can:
—Go after Obama and hope to defeat him on the issues. That also would require a true passion to checkmate his passion. Does she have it?
–Use opposition research if her organization can get it. In this day of nonstop news-cycles, news organizations asking tough questions, and bloggers who suspect any question, even a candidate’s statement about his/her birthday it’s a double-edged sword.
–Use surrogates to go after Obama and try to raise his negatives. But if you look at what happened in Iowa, you have to conclude BEEN THERE/DONE THAT. People associated with her campaign are widely suspected of having intentionally harped on Obama’s admitted youthful drug use to reporters and repeatedly-mentioning his Muslim links in tactics that had a fetid Rovian reek to many.
Moreover, by all accounts Obama did hugely well with women, independent voters and young people. Clinton can try to (a) win these groups over (b) raise his negatives so they don’t like Obama.
But if she spends the next few months NOT talking issues, NOT being passionate, NOT focusing on what she offers American in the future and if she OR her surrogates spend their time trying to politically dismember Obama, she could lose a lot of passionate voters on Election Day who will never forgive her.
Her dilemma. On the issues? Or find a way to go negative. But is it wise to find a way to go negative — even if it was via supporters who were basically surrogates? Mainstream media, new media and voters are too sophisticated in 21st-Century America to not see the likely source. Clinton has enormous money and organization but the betting is it’ll move like a tsunami now to Obama.
You could argue that Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee got away with or even benefited from his unusual pulling of the anti-Romney ad which he then showed to reporters. But then the Clinton camp lost support when its supporters went personally negative on Obama — and got a resounding answer on Election Day when women, independent voters and young people cast votes for issue-oriented politics and against the politics of polarization that have poisoned American discourse in recent years.
8 Responses to “Hillary Clinton’s Post-Iowa Caucus Political Dilemma”
[...] Joe Gandelman has an excellent summary of the strategic conundrum facing Hillary Clinton at this point. My guess is that Clinton’s people probably don’t see the situation as being as bleak for her as Joe does. My guess is they’ll change nothing. She’s likely to win in New Hampshire, only a couple of days away, in the first real primary of the season which will boost her back up on that pedestal a bit. Her support comes from the Democratic political machine and they’ll be able to deliver solid results on February 5. Enough to push her across the finish line? Time will tell. I think it might be a race to the very end. [...]
No need for you to hyperventilate over Iowa; things are far from settled.
Let me do it instead, and even end by imitating how you “moderates” will react when a Democrat becomes our next president.
The ****** ***** got third!
WOOOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO!
Edited by Holly to remove implied obscenity.
Well, Holly, you can visit 2-3+ threads where I used the same term. I’ve checked here and it’s lesson learned.
I certainly think Clinton will keep at it until February…, what is it, 9th? She’s invested far too much time and passion, and has the money, to drop out before. The only way I see this happening is if she comes in routinely 3rd in the next few primaries. I do agree with DLS in the first part of his comment. If the order of things gets switched in NH, then Iowa will all be water under the bridge.
Go after Obama and hope to defeat him on the issues.
Nobody seems to give a flying flip about issues this election.
To complete the picture, what’s needed are the cables starting to pull the statue to the ground.
Somebody said “Nobody seems to give a flying flip about issues this election”
Actually, the voters do give a flying flip about the issues and are studying the candidates closely on the issues. The national media DOESN’T give a flying flip about issues – they are more interested in personalities, hype and inter campaign bickering.
As a resident of Iowa, I have watched the candidates from both parties and voters from both parties really work the issues and talk about them up close and personal.
I also have watched the national media circus clowns (very important objective “journalists”) pontificate on trivial issue after trivial issue – at the expense of discussing the issues. Nice job media gang – now go back to your safe little social life back in Washington.
She has a couple of options.. she can;
-Continue her personal grudge against the republicans, so she has a scapegoat when hillary-care doesn’t work again..
-Claim that she’ll end the war in Iraq even though it’s already winding down.
-Use her big stubborn ego to disregard any opposition like she did when she got caught in the immigrant license debacle
-Make sure she’s part of ‘the boys club’ when it comes to voting for military force but then jump ship and point fingers when the going gets tough.
Seems like a plan.. Oh wait, she’s already doing this.. and besides, don’t we already have this sort of mentality in office??
Hillary’s trying to play the humble card now but she keeps up with the anti-Bush jabs whenever possible. Let it go, man! The Bush admin is leaving office w/o a successor. It’s an irrelevant chip on her shoulder that hurts her character. Hey, it’s not our fault all you could come up with was Kerry in 2004.. and who wants to hear 4 more years of her blaming the opposition for anything that she can’t get to work??
As far as the issues go, I think American’s are passionate but can be somewhat flexible as long as they feel secure in the leadership. Character and a bit of humility is something we’re painfully craving after 7 years of good-old boys, egos and a flagrant disregard for opposing views. Hillary’s anti-Bush grudge stinks of that mentality. Huckabee and Obama seem to be above that and Iowa showed it
If this is one nation under God, then he’ll come down and spilt the ticket so that Huckabee and Obama run together w/o worrying about parties. Huck’s a charismatic leader and Obama would be in the ideal position to be groomed as successor, With that kind of experience, he would undoubtedly be the most significant leader since FDR. Save the combined $600 million that’s going to be spent over the next year on campaigns. What are our other options?? they’ll run against each other with some dweebs at thier sides..we lose one of them in 2008 and we get half of the talent that we have at hand.
Go Huck-Obama in 2008!