After several weeks of bad press and roller coaster like poll numbers, New York Senator Hillary Clinton got two doses of good news — news that should enhance an image that had become sullied recently and could perhaps help restore the aura of “inevitability” in the January 3 Iowa caucuses.
Substance and image matter in politics and so does a sense that a candidate has momentum. Now, suddenly, on several fronts Hillary Clinton seems to be on a roll:
#1 She edged out Oprah Winfrey (a huge supporter of Clinton foe Illinois Senator Barack Obama) to be proclaimed the most admired woman:
For the sixth year in a row, President George W. Bush is the most admired man and Sen. Hillary Clinton the most admired woman in Gallup’s annual survey. But neither winner had a very decisive win this year, with former President Bill Clinton nearly tying Bush and Hillary Clinton barely topping talk-show host Oprah Winfrey. This is the seventh time Bush has been most admired man and the 12th time Clinton has been most admired woman.
…With 16% of total mentions for most admired woman, Winfrey had her strongest showing to date in the current poll. But Clinton also had a stronger-than-usual score in 2007 — the 18% who mention the former first lady is the highest since 2000 (19%). Clinton’s best performance was in 1998, when 28% said they most admired her, just as her husband was being impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in the Monica Lewinsky matter.
Winfrey has now finished second on the most admired woman list every year since 1997 with the exception of 2001, when she was third (to Laura Bush and Clinton). During that time, she has come within two percentage points of Clinton for the top spot on one other occasion (2004) and within one point on two occasions (2002 and 2005).
This kind of news story isn’t one that voters are likely to read all the way through. But the announcement that Hillary beat Oprah in a poll of this kind will be a kind of “high concept” phrase that voters will pick up and some will remember.
#2 A new poll finds Clinton widening her lead over Obama — and Obama actually coming in behind former Senator John Edwards. Question: did Obama peak several weeks ago?
Senator Hillary Clinton of New York widened her lead over Democratic rivals in a poll of people who plan to participate in the Iowa caucus.
Clinton was supported by 34 percent of the people surveyed by the American Research Group, followed by John Edwards with 20 percent and Barack Obama with 19 percent. The poll was taken Dec. 20-23. In a poll taken Dec. 16-19 by the same group, Clinton led with 29 percent to 25 percent for Obama and 18 percent for Edwards.
Clinton led Senator Obama of Illinois among women, 38 percent to 21 percent, unchanged from a week ago, according to the American Research Group. Obama lost ground among men, the survey showed, trailing with 16 percent to 28 percent for Clinton and 27 percent for Edwards, the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2004. A week ago, Obama was at 27 percent among men.
If Clinton does win the January 3 caucuses, the task of analysts (more likely in the mainstream media than blogs, which will pick up the analyses) will be to figure out what reversed Clinton’s seeming political bleeding.
Was it the talk from Clinton camp associates about Obama’s Muslim ties and hyping up his admitted early drug use? Was it Bill Clinton: this site raised questions about whether he was a political albatross. Were we wrong?
OR was it a skillful, finely-tuned, well financed Clinton organization? Or, perhaps, Obama’s responses were not sufficiently-varied to impress voters? Did Edwards and Obama cut each other down to size? Stay tuned for after Jan. 3 for the answers.
But one thing seems clear: in terms of media reports and polls, Clinton is ending her campaign on a high note. It fits that frequent, unintentional narrative of political reporting: The candidate gets support…The candidate becomes a front-runner…The candidate stumbles…The candidate in trouble…The candidate stages a comeback.
It would SEEM — when placed against the context of the past few weeks — that Clinton seems poised for a comeback.
The ending to her campaign is more orderly. She has released an ad summing up the argument for her election, adeptly using silent images. Her husband Bill has told Iowa voters that it’s now in their hands. She’s essentially fending off what The New Republic calls Obama’s “Mommy strategy” to challenge Hillary Clinton for the feminist vote.
To be sure, all isn’t roses for Ms. Clinton.
Earlier today, the New York Times ran a piece saying Hillary’s role in the Bill Clinton White House was more of an adviser than a policy maker — calling into question her highly-touted claims of being more experienced than Obama.
So should we now say the NEW CONVENTIONAL WISDOM is that Hillary has clinched it? The recent polls would suggest yes. But as Vaughn Ververs writes on CBSNEWS.COM:
It’s closing time in Iowa and anyone who says they know who will emerge as winners eight days from now needs to be checked for post-eggnog distress syndrome. The easy part is identifying the candidates and reciting the messages they’ve woven over a year of speeches, debates and ads. Now comes the hard part – closing the sale among those voters who will show up at the caucuses on January 3rd.
….If there is a wild-card in this race it could be the process itself. The amount of attention and importance placed on such a small number of people appears absurd to many of those columnists and pundits who decry the primacy of states like Iowa and New Hampshire. But don’t overlook the seriousness of purpose that those 200,000 or so Iowans can bring with them. For them, both races appear to a contest pitting activists’ hearts against their heads. Democrats may be inspired by Obama’s personality or John Edwards’ message but Clinton appears to be the safe, conventional choice to send into the general election. Republicans may find themselves feeling comfortable with Huckabee’s conservative bona fides, but wonder if the insurgent survive the primary gauntlet that remains. In a race this tight and this intense, the only thing certain is surprise.
But this much can be said:
Hillary Clinton seems in far better shape in Iowa than she seemed just a week ago.
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.