Clinton finally finds a good attack footing.
Hillary Clinton attacked Obama and his campaign today over some mailers. I don't know enough to judge the merits of her charges, but from a tactical point of view it seemed very effective in that it allowed her to attack from a position of indignation and self defense. (They watched McCain and the NYTimes?)
The Obama campaign has responded, but I think they'll lose this round unless they can catch her in an open untruth.
If she can press this, it could be big.
Here's the video from CNN. Take a watch and tell me that's not the most effective attack she's launched since "Day One."
(Is this an indirect "we will fight" response to the WaPo story I posted next? The Clinton campaign has been furiously batting it down all day.)
Later: After failing with their first response trying to "prove the facts" in their mailers through a press release, the Obama campaign has taken a different tack by questioning the genuineness of the anger coming straight from Obama's mouth, (AFP) "I'm puzzled by the sudden change in tone, unless these were just brought to her attention."
The Obama campaign has responded, but I think they'll lose this round unless they can catch her in an open untruth.
If she can press this, it could be big.
Here's the video from CNN. Take a watch and tell me that's not the most effective attack she's launched since "Day One."
(Is this an indirect "we will fight" response to the WaPo story I posted next? The Clinton campaign has been furiously batting it down all day.)
Later: After failing with their first response trying to "prove the facts" in their mailers through a press release, the Obama campaign has taken a different tack by questioning the genuineness of the anger coming straight from Obama's mouth, (AFP) "I'm puzzled by the sudden change in tone, unless these were just brought to her attention."
posted by mikevotes at
2:09 PM
12 Comments:
From the video Hillary seems pissed. Sincerely and seriously pissed. But...
Hillary complaining about campaign tactics? Come on. That's like McCain complaining about Romney having lobbyists on his staff.
Yeah, the Obama campaign deserves a smack in the head for pulling the Harry and Louise shit. It just rings a little hollow when I hear Hillary complaining about Obama using "Republican" tactics.
It's the weekend, so I don't think the story has legs. Look to the Tuesday debate to be SC redux. Obama better bring his A-game... and his asbestos suit.
By
-epm, at 3:21 PM
I tend to agree that there's some hypocrisy there, but just from an effectiveness level, I haven't seen her attack Obama and have the right tone before.
Good point about this being on a Saturday. Of course, the video will get the replay on the Sunday shows, and it will be a Sunday paper story.
And, I don't know about the debate. They seem to be careening between attack and conciliatory tones. At this rate we've got two or three more shifts before the debate.
The real trick will be if she can attack in this seemingly genuine way rather than the smart alecky or gotcha stuff she has previously used.
It's difficult to stay in the right frame, and if it misses, it blows back.
(I think I'm just very impressed they finally got something right.)
By
mikevotes, at 4:13 PM
Agree about the Clinton camp getting the attack (counter-attack?) right this time. All previous attempts were contrived and treated this the eye-rolling oy vey they deserved. At least this time Hillary has the ring of authenticity, something sorely lacking to date.
Will the pundits be on her side, or will they treat it as what goes around, comes around? And is this really something that only gets the attention of political junkies like us... Does Jane Q. Voter hear about this? Does she care?
By
-epm, at 4:38 PM
I can understand the feeling of hypocrisy toward Hillary. However, in some ways that just emphasizes how Obama has set himself above the fray when the truth may be that he is a little more like "old Washington" than his speeches would have you believe. I've had this Obama health care brochure for weeks and it struck me immediately as trying to instill old school fear of what Hillary would try to do to poor struggling families. The family in the ad looks distinctly middle class (maybe even upper middle class) and I don't have a problem with making the middle class pay something for health insurance! However, I haven't studied their two plans in depth, so I can't say any more.
I think this tactic could backfire BUT if it starts to chip away at Obama's teflon suit(or whatever you want to call it), it could put them on a more even footing and I think that is fair game.
By
Ptelea, at 4:42 PM
I know middle-class self employeed peole who can not afford decent health care. Unbelievalbly expensive catastrophic insurance with ridiculous co-pays and deductibles that keep them from seeking tests, and routine care because of the cost out of pocket...
His health care attack is fair game and so is her response. HRC says "shame on OB" for criticizing her health care plan...since when when was commenting on a proposal off limits?? She claims is is out of Rove's play book...she would know...
Just normal politics imo...but HRC getting pissed will possibly negate any affect upcoming tears will have.
By
Anonymous, at 10:35 PM
Maybe a small nick in the teflon, but I'm afraid it's too little too late. What is creepy to me about the Obama piece is not that it misrepresents Hillary's position, because the discrepancy is not that large, but its similarity to the way the insurance industry stymied health care reform in the Clinton administration.
I rather doubt this echo is intentional. Probably it's just that Obama's people are too young to remember that. But if it is intentional, then it's another sly dig at the Clinton presidency.
Which is an aspect of the Obama campaign I find pretty obnoxious, since from the liberal point of view Bill Clinton was arguably the most effective president since FDR.
By
Anonymous, at 2:27 AM
Shoot. I thought I posted a comment last night, but it must not've posted.
EPM, I have a hunch the talking heads will look at this from a technical perspective because 1) the merits of these charges are a little difficult to plug through and 2)they don't seem too prone to go after Obama.
....
Ptelea, Oh, this attack is definitely fair game. I don't think it backfires unless they try to push it too far or try to repeat it too much.
They definitely won the day which is a big deal because they haven't won too many lately. (And it comes amongst all the will she/won't she withdraw stories.)
Let me add, as I put in the next post, that Obama appears to be risking his own halo by pushing hard for a knockout in Texas/Ohio. They're pushing their previous lines.
....
Anon, actually, I think it benefits the humanizing Hillary effort.
.....
TG, See, I wouldn't doubt at all that the similarities are intentional. I don't know if they appreciate the full context of that similarity, but you have to know these guys went through the ant-hillary clinton ads and literature from the 90's.
And, just for the sake of argument, LBJ? Civil Rights? Great Society? Clinton was good, and LBJ left disgraced, but we all tend to write off some of the big LBJ accomplishments. I don't know if he was better, but he did do some pretty big things.
By
mikevotes, at 6:56 AM
LBJ did some "pretty big things"...
Dealy Plaza
vietnam
Mac Wallace
picking up a dog by its ears
Hoover for Life
yeah...real samaritan, that guy...
By
Anonymous, at 10:49 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By
Unknown, at 12:54 PM
Okay. I'm definitely not an LBJ fan, but, if we're talking about culture changing liberal legislation, he did shepherd some big stuff through.
By
mikevotes, at 1:37 PM
Yeah, LBJ is a hard one to call... he is who I had in mind when I said arguably. He probably did more good than Clinton, but also more bad.
By
Anonymous, at 3:23 PM
Definitely more bad than Clinton, but I don't think we can forget about civil rights.
By
mikevotes, at 4:05 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home