|
||
Did Hillary Clinton's Media Missteps Help Doom Her Campaign?
It's tough to look at the cavalcade of sexist comments assembled by the Women's Media Center of pundits mouthing off during the Democratic primary race, and not conclude that media-fed sexism played some role in Hillary Clinton's electoral troubles.
That said, this media critic doesn't think sexism was her biggest problem there. Instead, I offer this humble list of the many ways Hillary Clinton blew it when it came to dealing with media during her campaign.
Underestimating the YouTube factor -- It wasn't just that she talked about dodging sniper fire when reporters who had been on the trip had video proof that she didn't. Or that her husband said something on a radio show and then tried to tell reporters that he didn't say it. It was that those about-faces and many more were immortalized on the Internet, allowing foes to pass them around like baseball cards -- endlessly reliving the worst hits of the campaign.
The Clintons, Bill in particular, seemed unprepared for the instant fact-checking and worldwide distribution that the smallest lies get online. It defused one of his biggest weapons, the ability to make any statement sound like the God's truth with his combination of personal charm and ex-Presidential authority. It also made him look whiny and evasive when complaining about press coverage that exposed his obfuscations.
Needless withholding of information that isn't damaging -- The Clintons gave Barack Obama weeks of free milage on criticism that they refused to release their tax records until close to this year's filing deadline. I knew the Clintons were too smart to have anything really damaging in the material -- beyond the fact that they've made a lot of money outside the White House. But this dynamic is something Carl Bernstein dissects in his book about Hillary, A Woman in Charge. In the book, he describes how Hillary Clinton fed some of the trumped-up scandals which bedeviled their presidency, simply by her lawyer-like refusal to release documents which might have proven their innocence. If she becomes a VP nominee, expect a struggle with Obama's camp over Bill releasing the name of donors to his presidential library.
Reliving the Whitewater/Lewinsky press dynamic -- I get that the Clintons feel persecuted by the press because of all the Mickey Mouse crap that went down during the Whitewater/Lewinsky/Impeachment debacle. But when the dust cleared, the president had lied to just about everyone, and the lot of a politician is to endure constant vetting. Acting like a victim every time the press wrote a tough story on them, the Clintons just encouraged irritated journalists to nail them even harder. Isn't it better to pull a McCain and charm them into submission?
It remains an enduring legacy of the conservative media machine -- and their own past mistakes -- that a couple so admired by the public has such awful relations with the Fourth Estate.
Follow Eric Deggans on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Deggans
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
It is over. Obama is the nominee. Let us move on.
"A couple so admired by the public", hello!! Hillary's negatives alone exceed 50% and I know very few people who look favorably upon Bill. The Clintons moved the democratic party to become a corportist republican lite party during his/her administrtion.
Hillary lost for two significant reasons:
1. Her vote for the Iraqi war authorization and the ensuing lies told, when trying to explain said vote.
2. Her LIES, not misstatements, concerning her experience and accomplishments; Tuzla, Irish Peace Agreement, Travelgate to name a few.
I will always remember the Clintons for Ricky Ray Rector, NAFTA and the manner in which they treated Lani Granier!
Media exposure *is* campaigning. So, yes, her campaign missteps hurt her campaign. Duh.
By not conceding and pretending she was still in the race on Tuesday, she not only cheated Senator Obama of his thunder, she cheated the entire nation. She keeps talking about her 18 million supporters, but she never gave a second of thought or consideration to the 18 million who voted for Obama. She robbed herself and America of what could have been such a glorious night, in which she herself could have had a huge role in starting the healing process.
She blew it all by herself. Her campaign showed how terrible her judgment is on deciding what kind of people with which to surround herself. She has a history of bad judgment. She does have some good ideas, but her campagin and her actions and words will always be a cloud over her ideas. She did that to herself. I feel for her supporters because I know they have the same passion for her that I do for Senator Obama, but they need to stop blaming everyone else for her loss.
Hillary cheated no one out of anything. Did she demonstrate bad judgment? Yes. Extremely. (And not for the first time.) But the idea that Obama--or any of his supporters--lost anything because she was busy being tacky is nuts. He got the NOMINATION ! All of us who felt like rejoicing rejoiced. Any complaints will quckly fade--or at least the cameras will turn away.
My mother sent her two hundred bucks, AFTER it was clear to everyone but Hillary and the millions of versions of my mother that she had lost. Some of them still think she can get the nomination somehow, by mesmerizing the superdelegates with her electability. Hillary's demagoguery has whipped up a movement she can't control, and if she had stamped out the brush fire of resentment instead of fanning it, we'd all be in a better position.
I think the folks nosing the roadkill need to look at "sexism" a bit more intelligently. Crap like "Iron my shirt" almost certainly gained HRC more support than cost her. Enough more that I entertained the notion that the guy yelling was planted. There is a difference between disrespect expressed in sexist terms and true sexism, which consists of stereotyping someone because she is female. The media did that, because (1) they are paid to hurt people and cause trouble and (2) they are, the men at least, insecure overcompensating Chihuahuas. But I never, in six months, mostly in the company of men, heard any actual human suggest that HRC was not a viable candidate for the Presidency because women are, you know.
The trap we have been struggling with for six months is that there is sexism in our culture, magnified in our media. But that IS NOT why we wouldn't vote for HRC, any more than it was "racism" to prosecute OJ. For me, the great moment in the spectacle was the state congressional candidate at my assembly meeting, passing out flyers and loudly declaring herself "the FEMALE candidate!" Talk about sexism.
"Did Hillary Clinton's Media Missteps Help Doom Her Campaign?"
Is this a trick question? ;-)
Hillary's campaign was doomed by left wing cowards,black racists and media whores--a group of agitators who worked for Mayor Daily of Chicago pushed this unknown in to the spotlight and the media seeking to make big stories did the rest--but, it is just beginning and we shall see how far the audacity of Husein goes against McCain!!
And you're an 'educator'? That scares the crap out of me. You have no reasonable argument against Senator Obama, so you resort to playground tactics of name calling. With adults like you in the education system, it's no wonder our kids are so screwed up when they get out of school.
sooooo dr4will .... are you paid by the mccain for president committee?
Let's see...can't spell "Daley," can't spell "Hussein," and couldn't hold a rational thought if it came with handles and a carrying strap. If Hillary's campaign was doomed by cowards, racists and whores, maybe she shouldn't have hired them in the first place. I'm just sayin'.
It is kind of sad to see that probably more than 90% of the media is so propogandized that they cannot see what the Clintons represent.
In the 90s the Clintons were demonized by the MSM and the Right Wing Smear Machine who painted the Clintons as sexual immoralists and liars.
In the 2007-8 primaries the Clintons were demonized by the MSM and the Left Wing Smear Machine who painted the Clintons as racists and liars.
In both case it is the elites of the Left and the elites of the Right who demonize the Clintons.
Why? Because the Clintons are of and represent working Americans.
90% of working Americans do not even believe they are working class.
Yet, when you ask them if they can quit their job and never work again they answer no.
It is this obvious self-denial that feeds their delusions and makes them tools in the hands of the MSM propoganda.
What on earth makes you claim that the Clintons are of and represent working Americans? I am not aware of either one of them ever holding a working class job in their lives. Bill came from a dysfunctional family, but I do not recall that he ever held a working class job. His mother maybe; Bill no.
The fact is that Bill and Hillary share a very elite background.
They were both born middle class and worked hard to get where they are. And they are not the shiny, packaged product of a Chicago-style political machine backed by a DNC that couldn't win a presidential election if the Republicans nominated Satan himself. Working class Americans respect Bill for the prosperity of the 90s and continue to do so despite a constant war waged by the media.
This is the great forgotten story of the Clintons. They were the outsiders. They were the change agents. Obama did his damnedest to destroy that legacy but Americans to whom economic policy matters a great deal don't buy that liberal blog trope. Bill Clinton was the only Democrat who figured out how to win in an environment of hostile media and a center-right electorate. Obama barely polls above the margin of error against McCain and the general campaign has barely begun.
Her campaign likely failed because she made these ERRONEOUS assumptions and stuck with them:
1. Her nomination was inevitable: Therefore, her strategy consisted entirely in filling up airtime with her "experience" and name recognition.
2. Obama is not electable: With this assumption, she only needed to remind superdelegates and no matter what else happened, the DNC would move to her side to protect the election of the Democratic candidate, i.e., herself.
3. Young people (voters under the age of 40) do not vote: Historically true, she assumed that this would hold true in this election as well.
4. To bring moderate conservatives to her ticket, she needed to "look tough" on national security: Led to the dual debacle of triangulating on the Iraq war and the Iranian National Guards are Terrorists votes.
5. The internet isn't important: She likely never grasped the internet's ability to transform scrutiny of politicians from 10 second soundbites into devastating 2-9 minute complete video records of statements and events. She also never grasped the fact that these records are available every second to countless millions of viewers. As they say, a picture paints a thousand words.
6 Hard ball back room tactics work: Back room hardball only works in the absence of all that pesky scrutiny.
To me, an older white woman, her vote for the Iraq War completely disqualified her for any office. At the time of the authorization for war, October 2002, she voted either to help her future political career or she is too stupid to realize she was being scammed by Bush about Iraq. I don't buy that absurd argument that "everybody" thought Iraq had WMDs; Iraq never threatened our country and was never a threat to us. It was obvious that Bush was chomping at the bit to have his war and she gave it to him. She thus is totally unqualified for anyone's vote EVER!
####################
succinct, couldn't have put it any clearer. =)
I don't care what she did wrong, I don't care what she did right. I don't want to hear anything more about her, just a line or two of the facts, please, that's it. Like "No drama Obama" says, you all just settle down. Take the spotlight off of her. Period.
Eric,
You articulate my thoughts exactly. It was a combination of all of these factors. Throw that in with the campaign making strategic blunders with caucus states and that's why Hillary lost.
The internet issue I've given some thought to...
When you look at how her campaign spent it's funds (http://www.opensecrets.org), the HRC campaign spent well over 19 million on postage and direct mail - nearly her whole debt! Obama spent 6 million. Big savings there. But she may have had no choice.
Her base was older and less likely to use the internet. They needed direct mail. Obama's supporters were young, affluent and internet savvy so he didn't have to bother with mailings.
This internet savvy base also ate up the daily barrage of negative press on Clinton. By the time anyone fact checked these internet stories, the damage was done, i.e. the RFK debacle.
As an internet savvy HRC supporter, it truly saddens me that her overall message and stance on the issues was ultimately clouded if not lost in the swirl of information, misinformation and biased information.
In my humble opinion, the single most damaging thing that happened to Sen Clinton's campaign was her statement that John McCain was more qualified to be President than Barack Obama. I don't accept that in the first place, but for the member of one party to state without equivocation that the other party's candidate is more qualified than your opponent from within your party is a very low rent thing to do. I was neutral and excited about both candidates until that moment. After that she was toast.
Wrong. She never said McCain was more "qualified" than Obama. She said McCain had "more experience" than Obama.
Which was true.
If you're going to base your whole judgment of Hillary on that, please get it straight.
Actually, I think what she said was that both she and John McCain were qualified to be Commander in Chief. She didn't include Obama in that remark.
She delivered the message loud and clear that she thought Obama was less qualified than McCain, and in fact not qualified to be Commander in Chief. She put Lanny Davis on Hannity's show for the purpose of providing ammunition to the Republicans to attack Obama.
Those are low tactics. Not acceptable in my book. You can try to nuance exactly what she did, but then I'll just pull more examples to demonstrate how she tried to kneecap Obama. Not acceptable in a primary. As far as I'm concerned, she and Bill can go live with Lieberman.
Now, if she got her wish and Obama disappeared, I would vote for her because that makes more sense than voting for McCain. But this notion that she's a victim and her supporters should be mad at Obama? That's a crock. The truth is the other way around.
I'd say the Bosnia sniper fire story and her scolding Obama "Shame on You,Barack Obama" were her worst moments.
My God what will all you gargoyles do when there's no more Hillary to bash ? You make such proud Obama loyalists don't you ? Trying to claim high ground while you vomit bash after bash on a fighter for Democracy and the democratic party. Someone who could push the Obama ticket to a General Election win.
But in the same breath you ask Hillary supporters to "just get over it, suck it up and vote Obama"........yeah we'll get right on that.
"My God what will all you gargoyles do when there's no more Hillary to bash ?"
Party. Is she gone yet?
I'm not bashing Hillary. I'm bashing the many Hillary supporters who rant and scream about "Obama doing this" or "Obama doing that," and now saying they will vote McCain rather than vote for Obama.
That's BS, and I don't understand why the Clintonites can't see that. The popular vote was almost exactly even. The candidates' positions are almost identical. Both ran fairly typical campaigns. Both made remarks that could be interpreted as sexist or racist, but in fact we know that neither is a sexist or racist. So what the heck is going through the minds of these Clinton supporters?
Obama has been much more kind to Clinton than Bill or Hillary has ever been to a 2nd place finisher behind one of them. So, what in the world is the beef of the Clinton backers? It's beginning to make me wonder whether the "I'm entitled, dammit" thing might really be true!
Reporters should be required to submit any paychecks from any Big Corporation or Small that might influence the storys they write. Too many so called news storys are just advertizements.
Using an attack ad mixed with a advertizement is how I see many of these storys.
The HMO'S have been too quite so you know thery are deep in there fighting agaisnt Hillary.
There is a terrible arrogance that often turns victims into annoying, obnoxious whiners. You start with someone being unfairly persecuted, like the Clintons were, and much of the public rallys round and defends them, asks how can we help to get you back on your feet. Fast-forward decades and the victims step all over everyone else, doing that end-zone dance everytime they open their mouths because they think they are so clever, and everyone will support them no matter what they do.
But guess what? That whole 15 minute thing -- it's way way over now. People get sick of the arrogance of the former victim who believes they are special because of their own greatness, rather than because they got stepped on, smeared all over the bottom of society's shoes, and the kind-hearted among us decided to scrape them off and try to help salvage their lives. People forgave Bill his basically unacceptable behavior, they forgave Hillary her often arrogant and obnoxious behavior. They did not ratify or embrace the behavior -- they forgave it.
The Clintons have been atrocious: obnoxious, racist, acting like spoiled thoughtless children, trying to destroy the Party if they don't get their way, whining, even weeping, running from one hand-out to the next exemplifying the worst of the corruption and decadence causing the decline of our country.
I hope they go home, I hope they stay home, I hope they never come back.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
