Hillary's Last Charge

The battle of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, was the turning point of the American Civil War. On the third day, July 3, 1863, the Confederate Army's failed assault on the Union forces massed on Cemetery Ridge -- Pickett's Charge -- marked the end of the struggle. Many observers believe the April 22nd Pennsylvania Primary may prove to be the decisive battle in the struggle for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Will this be Hillary Clinton's last charge?

On March 28th, Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey defied Governor Ed Rendell's political machine and endorsed Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama. Since that time, tracking polls indicate Senator Clinton's lead over Senator Obama has shrunk. While it is too soon to tell whom the April 22nd winner will be, it seems unlikely that Clinton will achieve the massive, double-digit victory her campaign has predicted. If she doesn't it is unlikely she can overtake his lead in delegates and total popular vote.

Why has an experienced candidate, who was once thought to be the inevitable Democratic nominee, been pushed to the brink of defeat by a candidate who, two years ago, most Americans had not heard of?

In her latest New York Review article, veteran Washington political correspondent Elizabeth Drew dissected the failures of Hillary Clinton's campaign. They bear a remarkable resemblance to the reasons why the Confederate army ultimately failed. In both cases, the campaigns thought victory was inevitable and this myopia caused them to make strategic mistakes. Clinton and the leaders of the Confederacy believed their efforts would be of short duration. Drew noted the Clinton campaign assumed "the race would be over on February 5 -- Super Tuesday; and [therefore believed] that a number of small states that held caucuses could be skipped." Both Clinton and the Confederacy proved to have inadequate financial resources and, therefore, suffered in a war of attrition. And, both Clinton and the Confederacy had no backup strategy.

Senator Clinton began 2008 as the candidate with experience. After February 5th, this persona fractured and was replaced by a series of images: fighter Hillary, vulnerable Hillary, conciliatory Hillary, confrontational Hillary, and most recently, "Paulette Revere" Hillary. As the aura of inevitability dissipated, her campaign mottoes constantly changed: "Solutions for America," "Change You Can Believe In," "Renewing the Promise of America," "Ready for Change, Ready to Lead," and "In It To Win It." Meanwhile, her financial support dwindled. While Obama's strategy depended on a large number of donors making repeated contributions, Clinton's appealed on a small number making the maximum legal donation. In March, Obama out raised Clinton by 2 to 1 and reported 1,276,000 contributors.

As the contest dragged on, reporters began to question two key claims of the Clinton candidacy. The first was that she had more experience than Senator Obama. The Clinton campaign argued the press had not properly vetted Obama and there were "things in his past" that would cause problems in a general election. However, except for his association with pastor Jeremiah Wright, none have been revealed; Instead, as Elizabeth Drew noted, "His record in the three and a half years he has been [a Senator] suggests someone serious about the job." Reporters then scrutinized Clinton's record. This led to revelations she had overstated her role in negotiating the Northern Island peace accords and fabricated reports she flew into a Bosnia airport under hazardous circumstances. As a result her favorability ratings deteriorated.

The second of Hillary Clinton's claim to be questioned was that her partnership with former President Bill Clinton was an asset: when voters saw her infamous "who do you want to answer the White House phone at 3 a.m." ad, many assumed that in a Hillary Clinton presidency both Hillary and Bill would answer the call. This strategy assumed Democratic voters would continue to have positive feelings about the ex-President. However, beginning with his intemperate remarks in South Carolina, late in January, Bill Clinton's popularity waned.

As each of these difficulties has surfaced, it's raised the question of whether Clinton or Obama would do better in a general election against Republican candidate John McCain. When Hillary Clinton seemed the inevitable Democratic candidate, the conventional wisdom was that she would be stronger. Now many question that assumption. As 2008 progresses, it's become apparent Barack Obama has run a better presidential campaign: he has proven to be a more effective fundraiser; he has run a better get-out-the-vote operation; and he appears to have the better temperament, he has proven to be cooler under fire. After 15 months of relentless pressure, it's Obama who's emerged, looking presidential.

As Hillary Clinton prepares for her last charge up the political hills of Pennsylvania, she'd do well to remember the bitter lesson learned by the Confederate Army at the Battle of Gettysburg: You must control the high ground to win. Unfortunately for Senator Clinton, it's Barack Obama who has taken the high ground and it's too late for her to do anything about that.

Comments

[SShaw490]

And questions about the Clintons' finanical entanglements are the barbed wire that's tripping her up in her charge up (Pennsylvania) Cemetery Ridge. The more people hear about that, the less they like it.

[horizonr]

CORRECTION TO PARAGRAPH 5

"Change We Can Believe In" is Barack Obama's tagline --- not Hillary Clinton's.

Obama rolled it out on 19 September at the tag end of the TV ad linked at http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/new-ad-obama-asks-iowans-to-believe/ --- and he's been been using it as his rally backdrop banner and as podium signage at virtually every campaign event at least since Iowa, I believe.

If you need a replacement slogan, Hillary was using "Strength + Experience = Change," for a little while last year.

I'm sure there are others.

[ChimpmasterDJ]

Comparing Hillary's mule-headed obstinacy in pursuing that which she erroneously believes to be due her, to Pickett's charge at Gettysburg, is offensive on a number of points.

First, while historical hindsight can argue that Pickett's cause was not noble, his own motivations were patriotic and noble and selfless, in the context of his time. Hillary's motivations have nothing in the slightest noble about them and are entirely for personal gain, mo matter how ill-conceived.

Second, Pickett was willing to face the ultimate sacrifice, and forsake his own life in his belief for his cause, while Hillary is merely sacrificing the Party, the values of which she claims to support even as she contradicts the notion on a daily basis. She faces only being sent back to her cushy Senate job, to continue poisoning our lives with her overtly neo-con votes.

[jayburd]

George Pickett was a preening egotist and a fool. Not to mention last in his class at West Point and anti-intellectual in general.

So, you're right, Comparing Hillary to Pickett is offensive -- to Hillary. And I say that as an Obama supporter...

[ChimpmasterDJ]

Pickett was a fool and an imbecile, but he came by it honestly, and actually believed in what he was doing. Clinton is neither a fool not an imbecile, and she's cynically lying her way into votes from the very people she is poised to annihilate.

[LondonTownNY]

Hillary's Campaign reminds me more of a movie from the 1990's and Hillary herself of the antagonist, Charles Lee Ray, a.k.a. "Chucky"

wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chucky_(Child's_Play)
imdb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094862/
youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gfjk_LOHJo&feature=related

[ljsfolly]

Hillary has proven she will be what (?) wants her to be at that time on that day. She has proven she will say whatever (?) tells her to say or what gems she comes up with. He jokes about the sniper fire was as bad as Bush looking for WMD's in his office, remember that? She has voted in the Senate to make her background there as to look "presidential". The war vote was to prove she was tough as the other warmongers and could play games with the big boys. She has endorsed the opposing candidate and the time she is running out for Barack to run a decent race is making sure McCain might be able to win. People are actually dumb enough as to vote for her soley because she's a woman, she will bring back the good times of the 90's, she has "real experience because she was married to Bill and she has been in Washington long enough to know how to work the system. The last one I laughed at as she damn sure knows about working the system! With blatant lies and going way out and telling on Barack the very things she is doing makes me truly wonder about what is driving these people who support her? What is preventing the superdelegates from ending this farce so Barack and the dems have some time to get out and fight the republicans.

[Titonwan]

Barack is going to be president. The Clinton's are going to try to drag this out, but they're running out of money and luck. It's just a matter of time.

[Doofus]

An interesting analogy, except Lee LOST at Gettysburg, which among other things was
an indication that he would make no further real progress fighting in the North. Since
Hillary Clinton *probably* will WIN in Pennsylvania, what are we to conclude?

Typically, in wartime. BOTH sides think 'victory is inevitable', no? One side is always
wrong! The side with greater resources in manpower & materiel usually prevails.
THAT was the Union strategy in the War Between the States.

In the current contest, who's got the overwhelming resources?

[Titonwan]

What the...? Are you trying to make sense? Did you even read the article? You one of them re-enactment actors that falls down when the fake cannons make noise? I'll explain. Obama=winner Schillary=toast

[rzan]

Barack H. Obama does.

[jayburd]

That it will be a phyrric victory...

[Pangaea]

I enjoyed your article, especially when your last point when you talk about taking the high ground.

When you cite her "Paulette Revere" phase as one of the times that Senator Clinton tried to reinvent herself, I chuckled once again. The first time she unveiled herself as Paulette, I was unable to muster any anger. As I had reached the maximum of my outrage limit, I could only chuckle. I thought of Longfellow's poem and decided that one way to contructively exorcise my anger was to have fun and spoof the poem. I put the result it in a HuffPo comment a few days ago. If you want to check it out, go here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/03/hillary-i-feel-like-paule_n_94954.html) and look for the post I made at 8:37 PM (Eastern time) entitled "The Ride of Paulette Revere." Let me know if you also find it to be fun.

[Mesaywar]

LOL, not bad Pangaea, not bad at all.

[JohnFromCensornati]

The South will rise again.

[efranklin]

If Clinton wins in Pennsylvania by even %0.05, it will be trumpeted as an earth-shattering event. The news networks can't afford to see this primary season end. Given this media boost, I predict that she'll suspend her campaign only after losing big in North Carolina. Barring an Obama scandal of Spitzer proportions, this is almost a lock.

[Syco]

He's got a bay mama out there somewhere

[PLUMPLUM]

I volunteer.

[cyndeewi]

I really don't know what to say about Hillary anymore. I listened to her on the Morning Show. They question her about Mark Penn. They asked why she did not fire him completely from her campaign. She said Barack Obama did not do that with when an aide spoke about the NAFTA incident in Canada. The host said (Obama paid a huge price in Ohio for not firing the aide). I have never seen her so quiet..lol

My understanding with what happen in Canada (NAFTA) was not true. In addition, her camp met with Canadian officers as well. Is this correct?

[BitJam]

The Canadian Prime Minister refuted the charges against Obama as well as those against Clinton. He said the original "leak" and "memo" were blatantly unfair to Obama.

I don't know why the MSM lets Clinton keep repeating this right wing smear without correcting her.

[b2008]

Because it keeps CRAP going like they want it to. The media is NOT ABOUT THE TRUTH any more. It's about sensationalism, conflict, diversion, and everything that is bad about America. Have you heard any GOOD NEWS LATELY!

[December7]

Obama had an unpaid advisor flirt with the Canadians, Mark Penn IS the Hilary Clinton campaign, blood and bone. His engagement is not a passing opinion, he is at the core of her long term strategy. She is the corporate candidate withe war industry, the pharmaceutical industry on her back, plus think of all those clients Penn will bring on board. No, he is too precious to through under the bus, unfortunately the bus is stalling.

[RENREVARD]

I LIVE IN MICHIGAN. WE HAD A LONG TIME MAYOR IN A NEAR BY CITY THAT WAS A BIG TIME CROOK AND A RACIST TO BOOT. THE PUBLIC DID NOT LOOK TO HARD AT THE NEGITIVE THING HE WAS DOING OR SAYING BECAUSE HE IMPROVED CITY SERVICES AND OPENED MAY GREAT PARKS.THE CITIZENS LOVED HIM! MY POINT IS ANY PUBLIC FIGURE CAN GET AWAY WITH BLOODY MURDER AS LONG AS THE PUBLIC THINKS YOU ARE TAKING CARE OF THEM

[DoninJoisey]

Nice analogy. I pray you are right about Pennsylvania.

At the last debate, which was civil, I didn't foresee the rapid change of tone in the Clinton campaign. Righat after that, we saw mock outrage, sarcasm, false victim claims - vast swings in her persona as she tried everything to see which image would work. The plunge into the gutter with campaign tactics was, and is, deplorable.
Most of all, her credibility is open to review. Instance after instance has revealed her to be unbelievable - it the literary sense - not believable.
The hologram of her "experience" has been revealed, and she's gone to even greater depths day by day - joking about her sniper fire lie on Jay Leno - yeah, it's funny - her now claiming to have spoken out against Iraq before Obama did! Is she trying to outdo Cheney?

[Countess]

Hillary Clinton does not exist. She is a figment of the fertile imagination of Hillary W. Bush the neocon fighter who lives beneath the world in a special place called hell.