Inauspicious Obama Moment
Let’s never have this happen again, k?
Via Wonkette (and others).
Sphere: Related ContentClinton, the Pundits and the Math
I’m funny, because I’ve cheered on Obama for the last couple months, and breathlessly refreshed as he pulled ever-closer in the IN primary last night.
Yet, as the pundits started to declare Clinton’s demise, I thought, “Don’t you tell her what she can and cannot do!”
Anyway, Wonkette’s Jim Newell has proved (using CNN delegate counter) that she can still clinch the nomination. She only needs 45% of the superdels and 100% of the remaining pledged delegates. Totally doable.
But perhaps I was just picking up on the subtle messages relayed by NYT reporter Jim Rutenberg, who seemed to be channeling Clinton in his story last night:
Very early this morning, after many voters had already gone to sleep, the conventional wisdom of the elite political pundit class that resides on television shifted hard, and possibly irretrievably, against Senator Hillary Clinton’s continued viability as a presidential candidate.
The term ‘elite’ also came up in reference to superdelegates, who, it was presumed, would listen to the advice of ‘Washington’s class of political insiders.’ Terms like ‘world of instant political analysis’, commentariat and punditocracy appeared, as well. Those elites are counting her out again!
Aside from the slap at the superdels (which Clinton would never pull), it sounds a lot like Clinton’s stump speech from the last three weeks. Though we can’t argue with Rutenberg for taking the pundits and other news media to task:
Of course, the political news media have not exactly showered themselves in glory this year. They have frequently made predictions that have been upended by actual votes from actual people.
Too true.
Wonkette’s stellar math notwithstanding, Clinton’s going to have a rough go saying that she’s the more electable nominee. Indiana should have been hers, and the fact that she barely pulled it out with Obama at his weakest (arguably) makes it hard to keep going.
Either way, if she could just drop out or be the nominee by 30 May, that’d be awesome. That’s when my thesis is due, and it’d be nice to have kind of a bookend for it.
Finally, this is the most disturbing thing I’ve read this election cycle:
But the impact was apparent almost immediately, starting with The Drudge Report, the online news billboard that is the home page to many political reporters in Washington and news producers in New York.
My question - how can you be elite and read Drudge?
Links:
Pundits Declare Race Over [NYT]
Elite Math: How Hillary Clinton Will Win the Nomination Now [Wonkette]
Vaguely Related
NYT’s Clinton Must-Read
Fascinating article on Clinton in today’s NYT. Some highlights below in terms of gendered language.
I know a hell of a lot about Hillary Clinton, but there were some really interesting things I’d never heard before. For instance, she’s the one who came up with the term ‘war room’ for the 1992 Clinton campaign strategy team. Incidentally, War Room is an interesting documentary about that time, featuring Carville and Stephanopoulos, who looks all of about 15-years-old in 1992.
“She makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy,” North Carolina’s governor, Michael F. Easley, said in endorsing her, and a union leader in Portage, Ind., praised her “testicular fortitude.”
This kind of language and pugilistic imagery, however, also evokes the baggage that makes Mrs. Clinton such a provocative political figure. For as much as a willingness to “do what it takes” and “die hard” are marketable commodities in politics, they can also yield to less flattering qualities, plenty of which have been ascribed to her over the years. Just as supporters praise her “toughness” and “tenacity,” critics also describe her as “divisive,” “a dirty fighter” or “willing to do anything to win.”
I’m amazed that they totally leave aside the ‘bitch’ memes that float around her (or expressed on national television by Newt Gingrich’s mom). There are only vague references to troubles with her public persona. ‘Uppity’ is about the closest they get to describing the usual ‘aggressive’, ‘too…’, ‘not enough…’ language that usually turns up.
That’s not true actually - the NYT just has someone else say it:
“To me it showed her brittleness, her coldness, her spoiling for a fight,” said Mr. Cooper, an Obama backer.
Anyway, I think it’s a really interesting article, both in the construction and the content. Especially, as it’s currently running with a flattering picture of Obama and his daughter as a sidebar.
ps - couldn’t hate the gas tax ‘holiday’ more if they were offering to fuel cars with puppies.
Link:
Ruthlessness and Grit Seen in Clinton’s Style [NYT]
Vaguely Related
Clinton’s Pennsylvania First!
The moment we’ve all been breathlessly prognosticating is nearly upon us. With this serious presidential primary nearly at hand, I’m not sure which NYT story depresses me more: Clinton trotting out Osama bin Laden or President Bush’s appearance on Deal or No Deal.
Let’s dispense with the first one. Clinton’s ad makes her the first Democrat to use bin Laden against an opponent. (But at least she’s being noted as first for something other than her gendered candidacy!)
I presume wolves and bears are in the queue.
I’ll leave the second article for a separate post as it’s likely to be long…
Update: In response to Clinton’s ad, the Obama campaign is pointing people to a 2004 Bill Clinton video where he urges voters to select a candidate that makes them think and hope over one that tries to scare them.
The Obama team is good, no doubt. But, man, they’re also really, really lucky that their candidate’s spouse hasn’t been in the public eye for the last 16 years, occasionally being the President.
Video via TMP Election Central (the post also has the video of the Clinton commercial)
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Chelsea Gets the Hillary Treatment
Looks like Chelsea Clinton is all grown up:
The softballs come gently, lobbed by voters who support her mother and are thrilled to see that the awkward duckling of the Clinton administration has become a glamorous swan.
That’s the opening line of a LA Times profile of Clinton daughter turned surrogate. Let see which ‘women politicians in the media’ boxes we can tick:
Her hair is long and highlighted blond. Her black flared jeans are tight, and her gray blazer nips at her small waist. She has a boyfriend, her own apartment and a terrier named Soren. (After the philosopher, Soren Kierkegaard.)
Hair, clothes, and martial status - check!
Mostly, her voice is low, slightly raspy like her dad’s, and curiously monotone.
Tone of voice - check! Though, also curiously, she’s being criticized for not being shrill. That’s new(ish).
…despite her poise occasionally slips into adolescent cadence, ending a statement with a question mark…
Subtle undermining of her competence - check!
Bonus points for checking the Hillary-Clinton-box of extremely unflattering photo!
Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a leading political media scholar, said in response to a different LA Times question: ‘I don’t think adult daughters are held to a different standard.’
Yeah, neither do I. And I bet Jamieson is annoyed that she was quoted in a story that reaffirmed so many of the double binds faced by women in the public sphere.
Via Jezebel
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Obama Criticizes Last Night’s Debate
And his remarks are pretty spot-on:
Some highlights:
I will tell you, it does not get much more fun than these debates. They are inspiring events. I mean, last night, I think we set a new record because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people. It took us 45 minutes!
Noting that ‘Senator Clinton looked in her element’ when asked by the moderators to attack him, Obama said:
Look, I understand that because that’s the text book Washington game. That’s how our politics has been taught to be played. That’s the lesson that she learned when the Republicans were doing that same thing to her back in the 1990s. So I understand it and when you’re running for the presidency then you’ve got to expect it.
You know, doing research on Australian elections - as dumb as they are sometimes - really helps put the American political process into perspective. I saw a clip yesterday with the now-Deputy PM Julia Gillard congratulating ALP supporters for raising ‘tens of thousands of dollars’ during the election. I chuckled, and then felt a little dead inside.
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Presidential Contusions
You may have noticed that I’ve been posting less about the election lately. Cheerfully, I am not paid to write this chaff - I spend this much time on the web for free! I am, therefore, not obligated to participate in the black hole of waiting for April 22.
Will she? Won’t she? Let’s speculate wildly!
I do empathize with Nora Ephron, though:
I’ve been thinking about [Clinton] in a fairly pathological way ever since 1992 and dreaming about her as well. She is me, and then again she’s not. I used to love her and I no longer do, but unlike what usually happens when love dies, I still think about her far too much. When she tells a big lie, like her recent Bosnia episode, I can lose hours trying to figure out why. I mean, why?
It’s true - I spend hours thinking about and discussing the seemingly unabashed train wreck that is the Clinton campaign. Why hasn’t she cracked heads? Why the Bosnia thing? I can think of a host of questions I’d like to ask her.
I asked some of them to Bill Clinton this morning, as, like Ephron, I am dreaming about the Clintons. We were having a chat about the campaign, and I was explaining my research on Clinton, the press and New Hampshire.
It was starting to get uncomfortable, though - this chat between Bill and me - because it was increasingly clear that he was going to ask me to volunteer or perhaps even work for the campaign (I’m also job hunting). So, here I was, in my dream, putting off telling the former president that I was… not so much backing his wife anymore.
I mean, awkward! And kind of stressful because he’s seemed pretty angry lately…
So stressful, apparently, that my leg muscle spasmed, and I got a charley horse* in my right thigh. I even got a few seconds of ‘What the…?!?’ in my dream before waking up in pain.
Suffice to say, the pain I feel for Clinton is real. And does no go away with swimming and/or stretching.
*- or ‘corkie’ in Australian (thanks, Wikipedia)
Link:
Hooked on Hillary [HuffPost via Jezbel]
I’ve got a couple of postscripts…
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Adventures in Reading: Illinois Terror Edition
It’s a bit late and I’ve been in Bendigo all day (Yes, Bendigo. Fun stories about why I should purchase new flip flops tomorrow…), and I’m rather tired. So you’ll forgive my misreading of this paragraph from electoral-vote.com:
A reader pointed out that since it is virtually certain that a U.S. senator will be elected President, some governor will get to fill a Senate seat. If Hillary Clinton wins, it will be whoever is then governor of New York. It might be David Paterson (D), unless he is brought down by his own sex scandal, in which case it will be Joe Bruno (R), currently state Senate majority leader (unless he has a sex scandal, in which case–no, let’s not go there). If Barack Obama wins, Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich (D) will appoint another Democrat to replace him.
I read it as the governor himself (himselves?) will replace the departing President-elect. That is obviously wrong and in no way how the system works. My brain quickly came around and took another crack at it. But that momentary thought of Blago in the Senate was enough to make me think about switching back to Clinton.
Then again, he’d probably be doing less damage in a place where there are lots of votes to neutralize him. (Other than the IL House and Senate, I mean…)
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Items of Note on Friday Night
Immigration officers are trading sex for documents. The NYT has the story, as well as what I imagine to be quite a tacky audio recording.
Also, Bill Richardson endorsed Obama. Does this mean that I’ve technically donated to the Obama campaign now? I’m glad to see Richardson’s quirky charm on the campaign trail once again.
As long as he doesn’t run into Melisa Etheridge again, everything should be fine.
Mild LOST spoiler inside: (more…)
Sphere: Related ContentVaguely Related
Obama: A More Perfect Union
Kind of speaks for itself. Video and text below:
Full transcript [NYT]
After the jump, some screenshots of CNN’s ticker missing the point: (more…)
Sphere: Related Content