Losing Pretty at Dem Debate

Was it the awkward handshake at the end or the half-hearted delivery of scripted attack lines that made Hillary Rodham Clinton come across as the one conceding the race in the Democratic presidential debate on Thursday?

Surprisingly, Clinton showed no signs of a combatant who had come to change the game against Barack Obama. Perhaps she is coming around to the view that Obama's nomination is inevitable but that his victory in November is not. By easing into a gracious exit strategy, Clinton would hope to be in shape to pick up the pieces if Democrats lose the general election under Obama.

Or maybe the Clinton camp believes that debates are not the place to tear into Obama -- and some other tactic is in the works. Either way, in this debate Clinton chose against making a real effort to win ugly. Craig's Webcam Review now on CQ Politics Trail Mix

Comments

[DennyCrane]

I agree. If what we saw really was her way of graciously exiting, it was self-serving. She can pretend to be doing it for the good of the party, but really it's about her. She knows she can't win this time and the longer she fights this, the more damage she does to her own image. By bowing out now and waiting for Obama to lose, she sets herself up to be the presumed frontrunner in 2012.

[standforpeace]

I am deeply opposed to Clinton for her vote on the war in Iraq, refusal to admit her error, and recent vote on Iran. I also believe that she and Bill engaged in race baiting in this campaign (it wasn't an accident and not the first time for him either). However, if she finds a graceful way to exit this race, good on her. I for one won't be attempting to investigate whether her motivations were self-serving or not.

Here is the lesson that we should all have learned in the past 8 years. Politicians are self-serving -- their primary goal is advancing on their career path. Why blame them for that when it's what most of us do in our work life? We're not going to change that aspect of the folks who seek political office. However, we can change what those politicians see as the path to career advancement. It is up to us, the voters and even more fundamentally the people of this country, to direct their ambition and self-serving tendencies. For example, it's up to us to teach our "leaders" that we don't appreciate and won't reward war mongering.

So if Hillary Clinton does the right thing for self-interested reasons, that's fine with me. Because what I am so very tired of is politicians who think so little of the American people that they do the wrong things for selfish reasons. And what I'm even more tired of is the the fact that their low opinion of us is so often proven to be an accurate assessment (otherwise how in the hell did George Bush get reelected in 2004?)

[Ping]

You've had it wrong for about 10 months now Craig. You have consistently underestimated Obama as a candidate and a politician.

She swung at him once last night, she got booed, and he didn't swing back. Instead he engaged her on policy and he came across as knowledgeable, reasonable, and not angry and hateful. You still haven't learned the lesson from the 2004 Presidential Debates, the one who doesn't look like an asshole at the end, wins.

[DepartmentalAsset]

Why is it that Hillary must exit graciously and Obama does not have to win convincingly? With all of his problems, John McCain will obtain significantly more delegate votes than the runner-up in the Republican nomination. Obama seems content on demanding his opponents quit when the going gets tough. It's astonishing Obama is willing to negotiate a deal with Edwards (winner of 26 delegates) but tells Hillary's supporters to hit the road and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[EspressoAtNoon]

You're putting words into Obama's mouth. He NEVER asked Hillary to quit. He just demands that she play fair (i.e. don't sign an agreement not to count FL and MI votes, and then when you need them act as though they should now count).

[inthemachine]

11 loses in a row speaks for itself

[eshalom]

Did anyone else notice how Campbell Brown kept cutting Hillary Clinton off in mid-sentence in last night"s debate while allowing Obama free rein? In spite of Campbell"s rude treatment, Clinton still won the Austin debate hands down from her opening statement to her closing words.

http://katalusis.blogspot.com/2008/02/clinton-wins-austin-debate-hands-down.html and at
http://katalusis.blogspot.com/2008/02/clintons-substance-trumps-obamas-style.html

[EspressoAtNoon]

I completely disagree. Obama countered all of her points very articulately and convincingly.

There wasn't a single time where I felt that she bested him on any issue.

However, she did at least acknowledge that illegal immigration should be stopped and that it lowers wages, whereas Obama more or less never even addresses the illegal immigration flow problem and the problems it creates.

In my opinion this is his greatest weakness, though McCain is more or less on the same page as he and Hillary, so it looks like it won't be an issue in the general election (though it should).

[RusStyles]

This wasn't even close, unless you're drunk on Clinton-Aid. To her credit, she had a few good moments. But for someone who claims to be so much more experienced and ready to lead day one, Obama more than held his own. He deftly parried every thrust, and left her with no where to go...And, when she went to the gutter, that backfired. He stayed cool like the opposite side of a pillow. Actually the Xerox crack made he appear juvenile (Bushesque); not the leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth.

Take off your blinders...

[DemandTruth]

Actually, I noticed that she did this to BOTH candidates after almost every answer. I was hoping somebody would slap her! What is it about Clinton supporters that when you're not viciously attacking Obama over nothing, you're playing the poor Hillary victim game?

The more you pull this crap, the more turned off we are to anything Clinton has to say, you know.

[AnninCA]

Gee, which candidate is the true Democrat?

Think she proved that one, hands down.

Meanwhile, he attacks everything the Democrats did for 20 years.

[OrangeSam]

Well, for twenty years, the Democrats haven't acted in a democatic fashion.

[outnow]

Paul Krugman makes a good point today in his opinion column in the NYT about the fact that the Democrats will probably be unable to "fix" the economy, even if they win. The result would be a victory for the far right wing in the next election cycle.

The reason that the Democrats would be unable to fix the economy will be the resistance of the Republicans to any plan other than a tax cut.

Hillary is a technocrat with a pro-business agenda. She, like other "popular" kids in high school ran for various offices with varied results. Her solutions to the economic crisis would be inadequate and the Krugman prophesy would come true - a right wing resurgence in the next election cycle.

Obama is the popular guy in high school who would win but not have the technical skills or knowledge to "fix" the economy. Again, Krugman's prophesy would come true. The economy would continue to suffer and a right wing president and congress would take back the Whitehouse.

Both candidates are intelligent with Hillary being the winner. Neither candidate understands or is able to do what is necessary to fix the economy. The Republicans will block any real means to economic recovery and then regain the presidency.

Unless the victor and the vanquished candidate come together and are able to assist the Democratic party in putting the economy back together is a way favorable to the middle class, the Krugman prophesy will come true.

[OrangeSam]

Somehow, FDR didn't have the economy fixed by '36 and got reelected.

[DemandTruth]

IT'S THE HYPOCRISY, STUPID!

Look I don't care that candidates borrow words and ideas from eachother or others. It's called discussion and the fleshing out of ideas. It's called agreeing with a good idea. No problemo.

What I do have a problem with is politicians trying to crucify someone for committing adultery when they're doing cheating of their own.

What I do have a problem with is politicians decrying our "welfare state" ie: helping poor people when they recieve WAY MORE welfare in the form of corporate subsidies and bailouts than poor people could ever dream of!

What I have a problem with is politicians crying for tax cuts for themselves when they ALREADY pay less taxes than I do.

What I have a problem with is politicians hating and villifying gays as they solicit gay sex in public bathrooms or prey on little boys.

What I have a problem with is politicians attacking others for "plagiarism" as they plagiarize others' inspiring words for themselves.

Can you see the pattern here? It's the hypocrisy stupid! And all of the above examples are Republican tactics except one. Can you spot it? Or are they ALL Republican tactics and some people just can't admit it?

[Bulbul]

I have to admit, yesterday I opted not to watch the debate, sound bites were coming from the other room . Towards the end though , I did watch the last forty five minutes of it.
Hillary, always is the best debater from both the isles, she is a very smart woman and came across as such. Obama has come a long way, he was equally good.
At the end of the day, she came out very strong, and she is aware of the fact, no matter how able she is, what ever she does will always be taken ia a wrong way.

Craig, we are not really not ready for a powerful President, who happens to be a woman !

[dtd]

Craig Crawford has been following this campaign and the Clinton long enough to recognize both John Edward's and Bill Clinton's lines when he hears them.

Obama's been beat up for a week over Clinton's plagiarism allegations, but she's guilty of worse: HYPOCRISY!

Bill Clinton 1992: "The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time."

Hillary Clinton Tonight: "You know, the hits I"ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country."

Edwards the December 13 debate:

"What's not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what's at stake is whether America is going to be fine."

Hillary Clinton Tonight:

"You know, whatever happens, we're going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people. And that's what this election should be about."

[TurnThePageGA]

Look as an Obama supporter from Day One I don't think this is no big deal just like I think Obama using Deval Patrick's "Just Words" is no big deal. If we start searching you probably will find that someone sometime said something similar to what John said in December.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

That's NOT the tune many Clinton supporters have been singing here for days, it seemed as if she even attacked him again last night during the debate for plagiarism, with her 'Xerox' comment.

About as disingenuous and hypocritical as it gets, unless you're republicant.

[StephenJK]

Either way, Obamatrons have effectively alienated a good portion of the democratic electorate. Don't be surprised in November when we elect the 3rd straight republicant to the WH.

[classof77]

I don't know, what I saw tonight reminded me of the smartest girl in the class debating the most popular boy. The girl has a far more powerful intellect and nuanced grasp of the subject matter, but the boy looks good and sounds good. The girl is more sophisticated and vastly more informed; in fact, they're in completely different leagues. However, the boy has the "common touch," he speaks in simple terms that appeal to the less discerning (how difficult it must be for her to make the American populace understand the exigency of truly universal healthcare!). The outcome is that the average audience member, including those who are blinded by his charisma, see a draw, while only the most perceptive viewers are impressed with the subtleties and depth of her worldview, her command of and facility with the facts of each issue. No wonder Barack Obama is running away with this race--Hillary Clinton's virtuousity has got to be well over the heads of most voters.

It is a source of great sadness to me to realize that a truly brilliant mind will never be able to win an election in the modern-day United States. The closest we probably came to it was when Hillary was First Lady.

[vernonbc]

Oh, give me a break. Barack Obama is widely acknowledged by very authoritative people to be one of the most brilliant people they've met. Hillary is very bright too but please don't demean your candidate by saying foolish things about her opponent.

[foufou]

Perhaps I'm the average Obama supporter...graduate degree and law degree from Univ. of Chicago. Unable to understand a nuanced argument...not discerning. Insulting the intelligence of Obama supporters has really worked for HRC so the height of discernment is to continue to do so!

[maggieb]

Great post. You call it exactly the way it is. Your point will make sense to the deluded this time next year when Barack cant deliver the CHANGE they expect, especially to the people that are supporting him for no other reason but that they see him as their "Savior".

[MsLiz]

Hillary is very knowledgeable, but sometimes her conclusions seem off the wall, like the proposal to give every newborn child a few thousand dollars. If you think Obama is less knowledgeable, I think you may not be listening.

Really, Obama supporters are not delusional. They just have different opinions from you. We also are taking into account that Hillary will lose in November.

[jp1949]

I totally agree with you. It is absolutely frustrating to watch it happen. If Hillary doesn't win the nomination it will sour me forever on the intelligence of many members of the Democratic party.

[jfor]

Isnt it funny how your candidate (Hillary) gets all your love and support but somehow her weaknesses and truths are staring you in the face yet you cannot or will not see them. The biggest truth of all about Hillary is she cannot win against McCain. She cannot and will not win against him. Obama and his supporters have nothing to do with that truth.

Hillary has flaws that will keep her from the Whitehouse forever. The sooner you see that the less reason you will have to blame anyone but yourself for a republican win in November. Obama is not your problem, your Bushlike faith and devotion to Hillary is.

[StephenJK]

You assume a lot.

To be quite honest, I can't support Obama at this time. His meteoric rise to super stardom startles me and quite frankly scares the bejeesus out of me. No one in history will have as short a political career as he does going for the WH. His words on Iran scare me. His words on Pakistan scare me. It is precisely that inexperienced view that got us into the mess we are in today. Nobama thank you.

[PTTY]

McCain: The 'Anti-Lobbyist' Who Works With Lobbyists

Well if you vote for McCain nothing will change