The Clinton Crystal Ball: What About Day Two?

She's run a sprawling national organization.
She's delegated responsibility and authority to experts to work on her behalf.
She's incorporated her husband into the organization and allowed him to use his legendary political skills to do her bidding.
She has run up against a massive unforeseen challenge to her organization.

So, yes, Hillary Clinton definitely has experience. That experience -- her only national executive experience -- has been in the running of her campaign for president. And what has been the result? A complete and utter breakdown of the organization she leads, a distracting, out-of-control husband who has ignored any and all authority, extensive and ugly infighting among her staff, angry and sarcastic outbursts by the executive herself, and a bitterly divided party in the midst of the most important election in a generation.

Hillary Clinton's campaign is nothing less than a crystal ball into the future of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

You want to know what Bill Clinton's role will be in a Hillary Clinton administration? The crystal ball was South Carolina. According to the LA Times today, he unilaterally ignored Hillary's appointed officers. He was told by the campaign to leave South Carolina to them and go to other southern states. But he said no, he had to be in South Carolina. Frustrated staffers called it a "one man mission." And that one man mission, full of race-baiting and angry rhetoric, served to alienate democrats and fueled the beginning of the exodus of the so-called Super Delegates, beginning with Ted Kennedy.

You want to know how the White House will be run under President Hillary Clinton? The crystal ball has materialized just in the past few weeks as the rumored infighting among her campaign staff has become public and much more ugly. Campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle is fired. But Harold Ickes says it's all Mark Penn's fault. Mark Penn says he has "no direct authority in the campaign" and that it's all Solis Doyle, Ickes and Mike Henry's doing. Howard Wolfson counters that it's Penn who has top responsibility. And remember Billy Shaheen? He was the first major firing after he launched a low blow against Obama several months ago.

You want to know how a Hillary Clinton White House would face the "unforeseen crisis" she alludes to at every campaign stop? The crystal ball is none other than Barack Obama. Clinton's "inevitability" campaign, as it's been called, tells us how unexpected Obama was to the Clinton organization. They didn't plan on having a serious contest so they didn't build an election organization in many of the later primary states because they didn't think the fight would go this long or be this hard. They were arrogant with the press because they didn't feel they needed them. They relied on imaginary political capital that came with their own perception of inevitability. They didn't recognize early enough that the "change" message would resonate so strongly. They didn't understand or appreciate how important "hope and change" are to a country exhausted by the headlines of George Bush, 9/11, Iraq, Katrina, Housing Crisis, Stock Market Crash, Interest Rates, Corporate Corruption, and Health Care.

But how does this would-be leader respond to the overwhelming passion exhibited by those who seek hope and change? It began when she called it "false hope," and continued as she ridiculed her opponent and his supporters in the months that followed. The "Celestial Choirs" rant was not aimed at her opponent but at all those who support him. And those people showing up by the tens of thousands to Obama rallies are not only Democrats she would need in a general election but, more importantly, are citizens she would lead if she won.

So what does the crystal ball tell us? Does it tell us she'd be ready on Day One? Maybe. But it tells us something else, too. It tells us that she's not remotely equipped for Day Two.

Comments

[LBKN]

Snap!!!

... an angry, entitled, vindictive candidate... itching to lay the presidential hammer up-side the heads of those who have had the audacity to oppose her in the past thirty years... and I'll bet she has a list... and is checking it twice.

[UrbanInterloper]

This ex-Republican Goldwater girl has been wrong since day one. 35 years of making the wrong decisions, starting with which party to join and what man to marry and leading up to believing Bush's lies about Iraq and Iran. Then there was the brilliant idea of expecting to win over her opponents' supporters by mocking their optimism and questioning their mental stability by deeming then cultlike or gullible. The entire arc of her life shows what a failed president she would be. Not that she seems to care as long as she's in there picking fights to save her own reputation and imaginary legacy.

[Gilda]

Day 2 is the start of the next "Clinton scandal(s).

[BoulderSue]

If a candidate cannot define the hopes and dreams he/she has for her country and people, how can thay person lead? Remmber "faith, hope and charity"? All good Liberal values to my mind. It's in the Bible, too!

[bobpomeroy]

Hillary is from Illinois, so why didn't the people of Illinois support her? She's a New Yorker now. I don't see a lot of loyalty in that. How many candidates have there been who worked at the bottom of the political world for more than a summer internship? I think the voters of Texas will see right through all the caca-phony of "I lived in Texas" and understand it to be the language of a carpet bagger.

[LBKN]

... and why did Obama votes need to disappear in the wee hours for her to win New York?

[rosal]

I am very disturbed with her comment praising McCain's experience. She sounds like she is endorsing him. What is she trying to do to our party? Now, if she wins, all the other party has to do is play her comment on an add. This clearly tells me, she does not care about the people, or the party. All she cares about is herself.

[lenoirlady]

Very, very strance statement, rosal. Lost me!!!!

[Dansden]

Rosal,
some of us are convinced that you are just 'very disturbed'.........

or just very naive......

but your statement about Sen. Clinton 'not care about the people' brings me back to my first impression that you are just a 'very disturbed' person......

[ladydriver]

So, Dansden, Were you actually going to contribute to the conversation or are you just into attacking another poster personally? Not cool! Please stop back when you have something intelligent to contribute. Let's try to show some respect for one another. No matter who we support, we are all still Americans and human beings. Grow up.

[rosal]

The truth always hurt, doesn't it? Your candidate is endorsing McCain.

[rosal]

I am so sorry I didn't use the right adjective. This happens when English is your second language. Your sarcasm does not advance any conversation. Sad state of affairs. I guess we will loose another election with the party so divided.

[ontheroad38]

Great article articulating what is real. In these last days before tomorrow's showdown, Hillary's style has become the complete antithesis of Barack's. Mocking, sarcasm and new attacks about past cleared up misconceptions only proves the point of a desperate candidate who will stop at nothing. Kitchen sink tactics are old politics. What has gathered so many Obama supporters these past months is the promise of a better way to conduct our country's business -with thoughtful consideration, a respectful way of listening to opposite opinions and honest discussion. The energy has shifted. We no longer want tol tolerate candidates or pundits who act more like vultures - scooping down in the thrill as they go after the 'kill'.

[efranklin]

Hillary's campaign has been likened to the invasion of Iraq, which I think is actually an astonishingly reflective analogy. Like the Iraq War, the administration predicted an early decisive victory. The nomination process was, in Hillary's words, going to be "over by Feb. 5th". She was caught off-guard. She was decidedly unprepared for the Barack Obama insurgency. When the battle was evidently being lost right before her eyes, her staff launched a farcical campaign of spin a la the Bush Administration. "We're winning this war" they quipped arrogantly. Wrong. So very very wrong.

[Democrab]

Let's face it. None of the three, leaving out Huckabee, have any foreign policy experience.

That's usually reserved for an incumbent president.

This election and all the brand new elements we are facing as voters will be decided by personality, TV ads and who has the best bullshit.

We have no incumbent, no sitting vice president, a woman, an African American, and three senators vying for the crown.

Three senators! That's ridiculous!

These people are educated and bred for a legislative world and are all guessing about how they would rule in an executive situation. The phone ads all come under the "bullshit" category!

At least Hillary was around to rub elbows with the premier of Russia and the High Wizer of Zoolamgovia. I think that gives her the edge if there is one.

[kimbari]

Don't you mean *5* senators?

[Democrab]

McCain, Hillary, Barack, 3 senators??

[mengwise36]

Last time I checked, the campaign is ran by the campaign manager(s). To equate one's campaign to executive experience is a bit misleading, wouldn't you say? For that matter, we can count McCain out now since he was short on cash before the whole thing even started and had to "re-organize" his campaign.

I don't know who made Hillary the "front runner" to begin with. It could be a media ploy so Obama and Edward can attack her early. I don't know who made the decision to move MI and FL up and ultimated wasted a whole bunch of delegates. She could use FL since senior citizens identify with her more. I do know the media was on Obama's side, if not from the beginning certainly since Iowa. He can do not wrong and she can do no right. I do know race played a HUGE part in SC since he got 90% of the black vote. If the primary started with NY and CA, Hillary might be the nominee by now.

With all that said, I think Obama will get the nod simply because blacks got the right to vote in this country before women did.

[bobpomeroy]

A lot of apologetic non-sense. The article is right on, further, we have always used the campaign as a basis for judging the candidate. Feminism certainly doesn't preclude that in Hillary's instance. She makes trouble as a diversion and has no feeling for anything but the traditional vigorous opposition. Her campaign perfesctly presages another Clinton administration.

[Mahavishnu]

"WITH CLINTON'S NEW ATTACK AD'S, IT LOOKS LIKE HILLARY HAS FINALLY TAKEN WILLIAM KRISTOL'S ADVICE. PRETTY SAD WHEN AS AN ALLEGED LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY - YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH SUPPORTING YOUR CANDIDACY." **********­**********­*********D­ishonest post. Limbaugh does not support Clinton and you know better. He is doing the same thing Kos did in MI by supporting Romney.

[BuzzBuster]

This is coming down to who sounds and presents themself best. Obama and Hillary are in many ways the exact same on policy.

I can't define what being Presidential is, but I lknow it when I see it. Obama has it, Reagan had it, and Bill had it. Hillary and McCain don't. I don't support Obama, nor for that matter Hillary, but Obama has a presence that allows voters to feel they are safe if he is President.

[kimbari]

Thank you for saying that. It's only the truth.

[ladydriver]

Rush Limbaugh is "supporting" Hillary because he knows that McCain will crush her in the general election. Plain and simple.

[Mahavishnu]

"WITH CLINTON'S NEW ATTACK AD'S," **********­**********­**********­**********

This thinking amazes me. There are B.O. supporters claiming the 3 A.M. AD is an attack ad! It may not be an effective ad- but it is no attack ad. In fact, I have yet to see a real attack ad in this campaign. You guys take offense at everything. Is there an Ad that an opponent of Obam could air that you would not consider an attack ad? Obama's chosen people need to try to grab onto a piece of reality. Of course, this essay was yet another one full of non-facts. Clinton race-baiting? Nonsense etc.

[blaze]

I agree. When Michelle and Barack spoke in South Carolina, to a predominately black audience, they used the phrases of Malcolm X. "Don't let them bamboozle you, don't be hoodwinked." Malcolm X was warning his people about white people's rhetoric against the black militants. That seems to me to be a "race card". You see, anything can be the race card to a cynic.
Now Hillary is being made the source of the Canada/Nafta flap for Obama, even though she got the information from a Canadian news channel.
Hillary is now tarred, by the Obama campaign, as voting for the war in Iraq. That is pure bullshit. If you read her speech at the time, Hillary obviously believed there were WMD in Iraq and considered the vote as "putting teeth" into the inspection process. She called for heightened inspections and no further action unless a UN resolution was approved and we had multi-lateral support. That seems to me to be a reasonable way to avoid war rather than begin it.

[woodchips]

I agree that putting teeth into the negotiation process should have helped avoid war. If I recall, that was the main selling point of the Iraq war bill. But if your intention is to pass legislation that will help bring about a diplomatic solution, you don't vote for a bill that authorizes unchecked , preemptive aggression against a sovereign nation.

The justifications and rationalizations by Hillary and so many other Congressmen/women for their Iraq votes are like Presidential "signing statements". They'd like you to believe that they voted for the bill as they wanted it to be, not the way it was written. If you don't agree with it, amend it or vote it down. If you didn't take the time to understand the bill and all it's implications, then you aren't doing a very good job of governing.

[villastrangiato]

HuffPost's Pick

WITH CLINTON'S NEW ATTACK AD'S, IT LOOKS LIKE HILLARY HAS FINALLY TAKEN WILLIAM KRISTOL'S ADVICE. PRETTY SAD WHEN AS AN ALLEGED LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY - YOU HAVE PEOPLE LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH SUPPORTING YOUR CANDIDACY.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/24/kristol-politics-of-fear/

[mengwise36]

I am loosing respect for HuffPost now. How did an ALL CAP rant got "HuffPost's Pick"?

I'm sure IF Rush Limbaugh comes out and endorse Obama, his supporter will cheer for his ability to "unite the country". And no one will recognize the hypocrisy staring them in the face.

[ladydriver]

As an Obama supporter, I can tell you that if Rush Limbaugh came out in favor of Obama, we would recognize it for what it is: a political ploy to influence the "sheeple" who follow him blindly and don't bother to inform themselves of the facts. That's all his "endorsement" of Senator Clinton is: a political ploy.

Frankly, if more people would educate themselves about the facts, the competition between Senators Obama and Clinton wouldn't be so close...Obama would have already had the delegates he needs to win the nomination.

"Sheeple" do as they are told or follow what they were influenced to believe by their parents or teachers or other figure heads throughout their lives. "Sheeple" are governed by their prejudices. They don't think enough of themselves or their country to make themselves informed and educated about the issues, they just follow their "herd."

Voting isn't just a "right" in this country...it's a responsibility. Part of that responsibility is making an INFORMED decision. Every single person needs to examine their own views and opinions and be aware of the origin of those. Are you informed? Or are you one of the "sheeple"?

[huffyanika]

This is a good point.

[lincat]

HERE IT IS THE DAY OF THE tEXAS AND OHIO PRIMARIES. THE Clinton campaign has elevated John McCain by saying that both he and Hillary have years of experience and Barack has only one speech. Her campaign brought up the Muslim scare tactic and the 3:00a.m scare tactic. The Rezko issue has also come up. What about all of the scandals and corruption that the Clintons have been involved in? It's the same old dirty politics with the same old people. I find this depressing. After 8 years of hell with Bush and people want more of the same. Obama has been talking about power from the bottom up instead of the top down. this is not just about hope, it's about taking our government back, expecting our voices to be heard and expecting accountability from our public officials. Why would people want more of Hillary Clinton. ? I think that the way that she has run or not run her campaign says a lot of what kind of leader she would be. I hope that the people of Ohio and Texas realize that Hillary Clinton is about Hillary Clinton and not about the people of this country.

[mengwise36]

What about "all of the scandals and corruption that the Clintons have been involved in"? If the Clinton campaign promise not to bring up Rezko, can you promise that every citizen of this country will forget "all of the scandals and corruption that the Clintons have been involved in"? The fact you are still mentioning it means it is not forgotten so wouldn't it be hypocritical to say the Clinton camp can not bring up Rezko?

For your information, Hillary and Obama are neck to neck. He claimed the small states while she won the large states. If it was winner take all, she would be ahead. So it is very demeaning for you to say those who disagree with you, about 50% of the Democratic voters, are sad. The more mature people are supporting Hillary and we would not call you stupid for supporting Obama. So cheer up. One day you will grow old and wise, hopefully.

[kimbari]

I'm old and wise and I support Obama. Not only do the "more mature people" who support Hillary call me stupid, I'm a fool, a robot, I've "drunk the Kool-Aid," I'm a starry eyed dreamer, I'm asleep, the list goes on and on.

If Obama wanted to sling mud against Hillary, he's got a shitload of ammunition. He doesn't because he's a good soul. If he doesn't win, this country is doomed. Hell, it may be doomed ANYWAY.