Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary's Campaign Is Efficient, Tough, Joyless: Albert R. Hunt

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 12:16 AM
Original message
Hillary's Campaign Is Efficient, Tough, Joyless: Albert R. Hunt
Hillary's Campaign Is Efficient, Tough, Joyless: Albert R. Hunt

By Albert R. Hunt
Enlarge Image/Details

Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) -- During the past 15 years, I've been to three small dinners with Hillary Clinton. As expected, her substantive command of whatever the topic was impressive.

More surprising was that each time I came away struck by her ability to charm, and even by her decent sense of humor. So did the others, including a cadre of hack political journalists like myself who attended two of the sessions.

It is surprising because this isn't the Hillary Clinton, the leading presidential candidate for 2008, who most Americans see out on the stump.

Her campaign has been brilliant. It is great at small stuff like bracket scheduling -- making sure she or a surrogate appears right before and after a major appearance by an opponent. It is equally good on big stuff. Eight months ago, Clinton, 59, was bedeviled by the party's antiwar base for her initial support of the Iraq conflict; today it's practically a non-issue.

The Clinton campaign is efficient, effective, disciplined and tough.

It also seems to be joyless, humorless and lacking in heart and soul.

A take-no-prisoners, us vs. them mindset has served her well. She has widened her lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination; most polls show her defeating any Republican in the general election.

No More Easy Ride

Still, there is unusual hostility from neutral, and even some ostensibly pro-Clinton, people, and especially in the press. The media has its sights on Hillary, and scrutiny during the next month promises to be more vigorous than the relatively easy ride she has gotten so far.

more...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aOOcRBgoYXPw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Um, No. Iraq Is Not a Non-Issue.
It is one of many issues that have never been dealt with, and we don't forget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. This is about candidate Clinton, not Iraq, though they're intertwined. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
15. I agree with you - I think it has the potential of re-emerging
Edited on Mon Oct-15-07 07:40 AM by karynnj
Part of the problem is that the media has declared for the last 6 months that it is not an issue. In addition, there have been high profile comments from HRC , such as answering one debate question on the first thing she would do with start to withdraw the troops. This led to many people, who have not followed votes and positions to believe her claim that she is a leader in getting us out of Iraq. Those of us following things in 2006 know that she was in the - don't fight to change the policy because we can't win and it might hurt politically if Bush WERE pushed to start withdrawing troops - school. For those that followed from 2002, she was never a strong voice until after the November 2006 elections made her see where the country was. She and BC had the biggest megaphones in the party, but were silent in the run up to the war.

She and her husband have gone to great pains to say that Obama and she have the same record since 2004. Edwards, knowing that to win he needs to eliminate Obama, has said the same thing - pointing to Obama's Kerry/Feingold vote and the votes to "fund the war". (Edwards has also cited his vote against the $87 billion as against funding the war - though that was not what he said in 2003 around the time of the vote - a time when he still supported having invaded. But, Edwards himself did NOT back a deadline at that time and did not put himself on record at that time - likely because he did not want to commit himself when he didn't have to and because doing might have helped Kerry, who was expected to be in the race.

Dodd and Biden seem to have been more willing to call Edwards out when he claims roles they see as not being where he was in his one Senate term. Richardson has been too tied up in his own gaffes - which are surprising given his resume. Of these people, if Biden improves his numbers to close in on Edwards, he might have the potential to force this issue. Although he didn't vote for
Kerry/Feingold, he did offer an alternative plan at the time of K/F. A changed version of that passed recently. Especially if he added a deadline to his plan - as Kerry suggested in his speech in support of Biden's amendment - he could be seen as the serious, experienced alternative to HRC.

The people who could more successfully challenge her are not running. Of all the people I can think of, Gore and Kerry would seem the most likely to succeed. Had Gore entered, he could have raised the issue and not had any baggage. Had Kerry stayed in, she would have had a much harder time convincing people that she was a leader in getting out, as he had the position to call her out on it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. Really hard to be joyful when your laugh is criticized ad infinitum.
My god, that woman has endurance and stamina.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. That's so lame coming from you. Tell me how she perservered! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
5. "Efficient, tough,joyless". I'm hoping Hillary's WH administration will operate in similar fashion
Edited on Mon Oct-15-07 01:06 AM by oasis
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
6. This may be an effective analysis, but I'm damned if I care
whether there's joy going on in the campaign or not. There's no joy in Mudville, and to my way of thinking, we've succeeded in turning the whole planet into Mudville. I'll open the door to the possibility of joy when these bastards are out of office. When the indictments begin to fly, I'll be damn joyful indeed. Until then, I'll be sullen. I'm used to that, at least.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Exactly!
Only a Cheney could be joyful with the present state of things in general.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. And I'm sure Cheney's about as joyous as a person can be
History worked out just fine, for him at least. Hard to imagine why the wizened old prick is scowling all the time, really...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. History Always Gets the Last Laugh
Someday, God willing and science reaching its limitations, Cheney will die. And he will learn that he can't take the loot with him, and his grandchildren will be ashamed of him. A man should collect friends to attend his funeral, and praises to be sung at it. Cheney's got neither. I can't wait to see who doesn't attend his last rites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeffR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. I might attend
Just to satisfy myself that he's actually departed from this earth. Something which - Agent Mike, are you listening? - I hope only happens in accordance with God's Great Plan for the natural order of things.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. We Will Need Some Impartial and Official Witnesses, For Sure
Sometimes I worry about Ken Lay. Could there really have been a plot to disappear him? That's why I'm not sleeping now, when I really should.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:25 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'll get my "joy" fix at Xmas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
10. Hillary is just a continuation of the Bush administration.
She is simply part of the same machine, pushed by the same wealthy donors, the same basic agenda. I just cannot stand her because she pretends to be a Democrat, but doesn't stand for anything democratic. She is lukewarm on labor, on health care, on peace, on fair trade. She mouths all the right policies, but her policies are always later and less enthusiastic than are Edwards or Kucinich's or Obama's, Richardson's Dodd's or Biden's. She is just playing the game. She cannot change anything because she is taking money from the pharmaceuticals and the Murdochs and all the same people who fund Bush. She owes them, and she will repay them if she is elected, just as Bush has done.

When Bill Clinton joined forces with the Bushies in the aftermath of the tsunammi and Katrina rather than blast the Bush administration for its shortsighted environmental stance, it became obvious that the Hillary movement is not just about supporting war for the sake of war or money for the sake of donations, but about continuing the oppressive structure that put the Bush administration in power. Hillary is going to bring more of the same ridiculous policies that the Bush administration has given us. If she is nominated, it will be the end of democracy as our forefathers intended. It will be more domination by megawealthy would-be aristocrats. Please, please, wake up and stop supporting Hillary. The Bush administration's corruption has ruined America. Hillary will just bring more of the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-15-07 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. I couldn't agree more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Nov 13th 2024, 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC