The conventional wisdom has spoken: New York Senator Hillary Clinton is now a grazed candidate….not quite wounded…not reeling on the ropes.
But, in the last debate, the armor of her perfectly-run campaign was pierced by the razor-edged issue of illegal aliens getting driver’s licenses. And when that opening emerged, the swords dug deeper with several stories saying the Clinton campaign planted questions at open forums.
This included the inevitable overkill by Clinton critics and Hillary-hating talk show hosts — as well as the excuse making “well everybody does it” talk from Ms. Clinton’s defenders. Both of those heated arguments boil down to THIS in terms of balance and perspective.
In reality, Clinton stubbed her toe and when her husband defended her it seemed at times as if he was intent on grabbing her toe and stubbing it more for her.
But now, tonight, Ms. Clinton — not bloodied, not wounded, but no longer the inevitable nominee with awesome polls in upcoming primaries or early general election match-up scenarios — faces a real showdown in Las Vegas. Another debate. Likely another “pile on.” Like more tough — and even trick — questions from the media which above all goes after politicos who seem evasive and tries to nail them down.
Who will survive? Will she emerge stronger, or wounded by Senator Barack Obama (suddenly is on the descent) or former Senator John Edwards (so far the candidate who doesn’t quite catch on – -the perpetual Great Potential Candidate)? The New York Times sets the scene:
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton heads into tonight’s Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas with an opportunity: to try to erase the unflattering image that her chief rivals, and her own mistakes, have helped create.
Yesterday, in an attempt to neutralize one possible threat at the debate, her campaign announced that Mrs. Clinton would not support driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants as president. It is the latest formulation of her position, which has shifted since it became a tripping point in the last televised debate on Oct. 30.
Her advisers say they hope the matter will now be off the table, but Mrs. Clinton’s top rivals made clear that they would continue to press the argument they have been making in recent weeks, that she is inconsistent and overly political.
“When it takes two weeks and six different positions to answer one question on immigration, it’s easier to understand why the Clinton campaign would rather plant their questions than answer them,†said Bill Burton, a spokesman for Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, a rival in the race for the nomination.
“Wow, this is dizzying,†added Eric Schultz, a spokesman for former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, another rival.
Mr. Edwards has also given somewhat conflicting statements on the driver’s license issue. “The differences on this are clear: Senator Clinton is opposed to giving driver’s licenses to undocumented people, Senator Obama is for it, and no one knows where Edwards is,†said Jay Carson, a Clinton spokesman.
The bottom line: at one point several weeks ago it seemed as Clinton had it all sewn up and that she was a shoo-in not just for the nomination, but as a highly-formidable candidate in the general election.
But, now, after dropping the immigration driver’s license ball and due to her staff’s image-destroying decision to set up questions and act in as sleazy a manner as FEMA officials stating fake press conferences, she is no longer (a) an automatic shoo-in for the nomination (she can be wounded more) or (b) a fearsome-appearing candidate to many Republicans (she doesn’t have a huge lead now in match-up polls and has shown that she can be tossed off balance and seemingly go into a downward spiral).
So who will win the showdown tonight?
Clinton?
Obama?
Or Giuliani?
ALSO BE SURE TO READ:
—Marc Ambinder, who looks at the whole issue of planting questions as a widespread problem.
–Riehl World View, which believes the media wants to pull Ms. Clinton down to create a more interesting horse races story so it’s focusing on this new controversy.
–The Huffington Posts’ debate primer.
–Spacetropic, which has these thoughts on the Las Vegas “pregame rumble”.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.