iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Peter Dreier

Peter Dreier

Posted: June 4, 2008 01:42 PM

Hillary's Checkers Speech


Pundits often liken politics to a game of chess, where each candidate has to think several moves ahead in pursuit of victory. But Hillary Clinton's speech last night was more like checkers than chess. She's run out of moves to win the Democratic domination, but she took a page from Richard Nixon, whose famous 1952 "Checkers" speech sought to mobilize voters to force the Republican presidential nominee, Dwight Eisenhower, to keep Nixon on the ticket as the vice presidential candidate. Rather than make a concession speech last night, despite Barack Obama's clear triumph in winning the votes needed to clinch the nomination, Clinton told supporters at Baruch College in New York City that she needed a few days to consider her options. Then, shockingly, she said to the small crowd in New York and the millions watching on televsion, "I want to hear from you. I hope you'll go to my Website at HillaryClinton.com and share your thoughts with me and help in any way that you can."

It was an act of desperation, much like Nixon's "Checkers" speech on September 23, 1952. It was just six weeks before the November election, between Republican Eisenhower and Democratic rival Ill. Gov. Adlai Stevenson. Eisenhower, a World War II hero, was so popular that both the Democrats and Republicans had at different times wanted to recruit him as their presidential candidate, but he had never run for political office and his views on key issues were not well-known. He had chosen Nixon, then a senator from California, as his running mate to appease the party's more conservative wing. But just a few days later, newspapers ran stories that accused Nixon of accepting $18,000 (about $140,000 by today's measure) in illegal campaign contributions, what some called a "slush fund," from wealthy California backers. Many Republicans urged Eisenhower to drop Nixon from the ticket.

To rally public support, Nixon went to the El Capitan Theater in Hollywood and gave a speech that was broadcast nationwide on radio and TV, one of the first uses of the new medium, to appeal directly to voters. He denied that he'd taken any illegal campaign contributions. The money, he said, was reimbursement for "political expenses," not personal use. At a time when politicians didn't talk much about their personal lives or finances, Nixon provided a complete inventory of his personal assets, including his salary, life insurance, mortgages, and loans, claiming that he lived modestly his entire life, even after being elected to congress. In one of the most famous lines in the mawkish speech, Nixon denied that his wife Pat, who was sitting stoically next to him during the speech, had a mink coat, but instead wore a "respectable Republican cloth coat."

He acknowledged receiving one contribution that might have violated campaign laws. A Texan had given his family a cocker spaniel, which his daughter Tricia named "Checkers." Looking straight into the camera, Nixon said, "the kids, like all kids, love the dog, and I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we're gonna keep it."

Then, he ended his speech by asking the public whether he should remain the party's vice presidential nominee. He said, "I know that you wonder whether or not I am going to stay on the Republican ticket or resign. Let me say this: I don't believe that I ought to quit, because I am not a quitter.... But the decision, my friends, is not mine. I would do nothing that would harm the possibilities of Dwight Eisenhower to become president of the United States. And for that reason I am submitting to the Republican National Committee tonight through this television broadcast the decision which it is theirs to make. Let them decide whether my position on the ticket will help or hurt. And I am going to ask you to help them decide. Wire and write the Republican National Committee whether you think I should stay on or whether I should get off. And whatever their decision is, I will abide by it."

It was a brilliant maneuver, and it worked. By urging his supporters to flood the RNC with letters and telegrams, he was trying to put pressure on Eisenhower, not only demonstrating that he could mobilize voters, but also hinting that Eisenhower could not win the White House without the conservative wing of the party that Nixon represented. Eisenhower asked Nixon to join him in West Virginia, where he was campaigning, and met Nixon at the airport with, "Dick, you're my boy." That November, Eisenhower beat Stevenson in a landslide.

It is difficult to believe that Hillary Clinton's advisers didn't have Nixon's "Checkers" speech in mind when they decided to make a similar appeal Tuesday night, both refusing to acknowledge that she's lost the party's nomination and insisting that her next steps would be shaped, at least in part, by what her supporters -- whom she claimed were the 18 million people who voted for her in the primary whose voices should be heard -- wanted her to do. While Nixon urged his supporters to write letters and telegrams to party leaders, Clinton asked her followers to contact her directly by using her campaign website. Speaking to a much larger national audience than Nixon had available, when few Americans had TV sets, Clinton obviously knew in advance that the overwhelming message of these emails would be for her to stay in the race or at least demand that Obama choose her to be the party's vice presidential nominee. The subtext of Tuesday night's address was hardly subtle. Clinton's campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, introduced her as "the next president of the United States of America!" During her speech, members of the audience chanted, "Denver, Denver," referring to the site of the Democratic convention in August.

Like Nixon, Clinton was clearly trying to mobilize her supporters to put pressure on Obama to put her on the ticket. Some pundits speculated that Clinton might be willing to settle for another deal with Obama -- helping her retire her campaign debt, appointing her to the Supreme Court, or helping her elbow Harry Reid out of the Senate Majority Leader's job -- and thus help unify the party and enlist Clinton's supporters in Obama's campaign. But news reports Tuesday indicated that Hillary had told key congressional supporters that she was angling for the vice presidential slot.

Her speech later that night was evidence that she is willing to play hardball to get what she wants. Her speech was almost entirely about herself -- her commitment to public service, her stance on issues, her claim that she won more votes than Obama, and the implication that she represents a large segment of Democratic voters that Obama will need to win in November.

Like Nixon, Clinton is a formidable and strong-willed politician. She has many accomplishments to be proud of. But her speech Tuesday night lacked graciousness and any concern for her party and the nation. It was, like Nixon's "Checkers" speech, a pathetic display of both hubris and self-pity.

Peter Dreier is the E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics at Occidental College.

Pundits often liken politics to a game of chess, where each candidate has to think several moves ahead in pursuit of victory. But Hillary Clinton's speech last night was more like checkers than chess...
Pundits often liken politics to a game of chess, where each candidate has to think several moves ahead in pursuit of victory. But Hillary Clinton's speech last night was more like checkers than chess...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 45
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
09:49 PM on 06/05/2008
We have had almost eight years of a self anointed Vice President. We can see how well that has turned out.

Once Hillary realizes that she has not been fully vetted as claimed and that the Obama campaign graciously and studiously avoided bringing up the past and more importantly their present secretive financial dealings perhaps she will decide the Vice Presidency isn’t what she wants.

Obama is setting very high standards. We the people by supporting him in the way we are, gives him the where with all to make it happen. His stance with the DNC today on lobbyist contributions sends a clear message. For him to embrace as his running mate the candidate who received to most money from Corporations would greatly undercut his credibility.

Do we need to come together and unite behind our Nominee? Certainly. I cannot in my 54 years recall an election where the stakes were higher, nor one where the opportunity to change the long term course of the Nation for the better was any greater. It is because of these stakes and that opportunity that I respectfully remind all of you who supported the Clinton campaign that this isn’t about Hillary nor is it about Barack it is more important than any individual. Let the search for a running mate take its course and however it turns out do not let your emotions and anger cloud your judgment. Remember the issues that brought you here in the first place and vote accordingly.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RThM
09:04 AM on 06/05/2008
I think it's stretching it to see the shade of Nixon here. Unlike Nixon she had no clear-cut base. The fact that she primarily appealed to Appalachia and a segment of older women only became apparent well into the campaign. On Tuesday night, Clinton essentially delivered her usual stump speech with her usual manipulation of fact and reality. She's been doing variations of this since she was thrown for a loop by Iowa. What was she after this time? A few more days for back-room deals, perhaps. And money: "...help in any way that you can."
02:56 PM on 06/05/2008
Why can't I get my own "comments" all that is available is "reply."

Far stretch to compare Hillary's speech to "Checkers." Many visionaries saw tricky dickie for what he was in 1952, a freakin lying unbalanced crook backed by bigger crooks. Ike didn't want, like or trust him but was stuck and his handlers well aware of the political suicide of dropping nixon. Hillary's speech was weak and lacking, but it was no "checkers." Please leave nixon's legacy alone!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StatBabe
08:18 AM on 06/06/2008
Join the club! Don't you realize that the Obamabots are JUST LIKE the Bushies in 2000 and 2004? They are so wrapped up in the cult of personality and getting their unqualified "messiah" elected that they insist upon villifying Hillary, even AFTER Obama has won the nomination? Is this really so different from what the Bushies did to McCain in 2000? I don't think so!

These fools who gleefully insult Clinton and her supporters do not seem to "get it" either since Obama will certainly LOSE if he is not able to attract the bulk of Clinton supporters to his cause. And the more that I read tripe like this waste of bandwidth by Peter Dreier, the less inclined I am to vote for that empty suit in November. No, I do not care for McBush, but the nastiness of the Obama supporters combined with the vicious race baiting that the Obama campaign engaged in from the beginning makes this Democrat want to vote AGAINST that prick!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissDaphne
12:34 AM on 06/05/2008
I can't help thinking of the symbolism of her choice of location last night.
Underground.
Cut off from outside communication.

Has anyone totaled up the number of times she used the word "I" last night?

this is how she lost my support.

I'm her demographic, 51 y/o white female---but I have a decent education, and it shames me, shames me, how she pandered to less educated women by saying "count every vote" when anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the history of primaries SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that the popular vote means NOTHING in the primary. Mr. Obama was smart enough to hire really smart people who came up with a strategy to win the primary under the rules that Harold Ickes HELPED TO WRITE.

The process worked the way it was supposed to work. It allowed someone who wasn't "the inevitable nominee" to WIN.
02:21 AM on 06/05/2008
She had her party under ground because, in New York the biggest RATS live underground, and in the garbage.
10:11 AM on 06/05/2008
I too am in "her demographic" white, female, 57, with a good education, and I was for Obama from the start. Let's just say I am very keen when it comes to the natue under the mask people present in public, and I knew years ago that she was everything she has shown herself to be during this process.

During one of the debates I kept a count of the number of times she said the words "I", and it was very revealing. In the span of 15 minuutes I counted over 30 times! In contrast Obama rarely used the word "I". He most often uses the word "We" which gives power to the people.
I work in entertainment and know from my workwith Shakespean plays that whenever a character uses the word "I" too often, it is because they are ruthless and self loving. All his characters who are troublesome use "I" a lot! Richard III being the most villanous uses the word 9 times in his opening speech.
As to Hillary, well it was as if she thought she alone could fix all the nation's woes. That takes a huge ego and an unwillingness to share credit with the many others who work just as hard as she does.
What really annoyed me is how she thinks she can tell the American people anything and they will believe it. Must come from her years of listening to Bill's lies.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mesuki
10:54 PM on 06/04/2008
Hillary Clinton disgraced herself in front of millions of people last night.History books will not be kind to her because of her behavior,and Bill's crazy antics..Her biggest mistake last night was not ackowledging the fact that Obama won the nomination, and to add insult to injury McCauliff came out and presented her as the next president of the United States. What little respect I had for her is forever gone. The Clintons will never be able to fix the damage they have done to themselves throughout this campaign... What a way to remembered.
09:34 PM on 06/04/2008
Thanks for the detailed history. But you are giving Senator Clinton too much credit and not realizing that she continues to play the wrong hand. Just from an historicaly reference, didn't Nixon make his Checker speech in September, AFTER HE WAS CHOSEN AS EISENHOWER'S VICE PRESIDENT RUNNING MATE and accused of having a slush fund. By September, he already knew his place, Eisenhower was already the boss. Eisenhower was on top and was going to make all the decisions.
On June 3, 2008, Hillary was still campaigning for the Presidency and selling herself to the Superdelegates, AFTER Obama won the Nomination.


And another thing is President Bill Clinton. President Richard Nixon only had Pat Nixon by his side., Hillary has President Bill Clinton by her side. Where are the Clinton's sense of propriety? They don't know when to stop, like Bill and the Lewinsky event that went too too far. The Clintons take it to the Limit and Nixon knew when to quit.
07:42 PM on 06/04/2008
The Checkers speech kept Nixon on the ticket.

Her "tell me what you think" number hasn't gone over quite as well.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
laylahb
07:33 PM on 06/04/2008
Wasn't one of Hillary's first jobs in Washington on the Nixon Impeachment Committee?

Which side of the table was she on?
photo
unitron
Reverse Chron Order never stays checked
07:14 PM on 06/04/2008
"...and help in any way that you can..."

Sounds to me like she's trying to keep the contributions (of money) coming in.

She's still waiting for her campaign to pay her back, right?
06:54 PM on 06/04/2008
Oh come on, Obama won the nomination. Instead of whining about Clinton, why don't you look at the future and see how you can get Obama elected. Throwing insults at Clinton after your candidate has won the nomination only serves to keep the party divided.
06:47 PM on 06/04/2008
I love that speech. Nixon is SOOOOO bad and so guilty looking. It is like a Simpsons episode.
McCain looked more like Nixon last night.
05:44 PM on 06/04/2008
Ike was the last repub president that was worth a plug nickel.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bobzmcishl
06:46 PM on 06/04/2008
Ike is in the top ten of all presidents, but notice how the Republcan's hardly ever mention him. All they talk about is Reagan, Reagan, all the time. Ike, Ford, Nixon, and Bush (the father) never existed. The Republican's have managed since Ike's time to drive almost all of the moderates out of the party, which is a shame, since it has made the Republican's look like a bunch of looney tunes.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
lisakaz2
Da ministero dell'interno di Snark.
01:53 AM on 06/05/2008
Indeed. When I had Garry Wills as a professor, the Bob Dole fan among the students asked Wills to rank modern presidents. He was doing this with some kind of predisposition that Wills would be "exposed" as some raving liberal. Boy, was he ever surprised. The #1 spot went to Ike. Last place (this was pre-Bushie clearly) was Truman. Bet that Bushie would take over that spot or tie for last.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Forsetti
Defender of the Social Contract
05:44 PM on 06/04/2008
Great...she has already taken pages from Rove's text book on how to run a campaign now she's really going old school and using Nixon. Who's next, James Blaine?
02:17 AM on 06/05/2008
NO she is only going by the book of her party, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
karela
05:25 PM on 06/04/2008
Her behavior Tuesday night lacked grace. I sincerely hope that she recovers herself this week. Obama can not give her the VP because she uses force. Her only chance at it would be grace. The president is the president. She is a long way from acknowledging that she isn't the boss now and would not be the boss in the White House. There is no co-presidency. The buck stops with the president. Period. If she is to be further involved with Obama, she must give her ego a rest and display some humility. He won and he still displays humility. She lost and shows the opposite. It doesn't serve her well. As Hillary Rosen, one of her most staunch supporters, said in Huffington Post today, "I am not a bargaining chip. I'm a democrat." And she went on to say that Obama now has her vote and her support. That's all it takes to be a welcome member of the group for president.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:19 PM on 06/04/2008
I've often wondered if Nixon gave that speech with Eisenhower's blessing or without. (And, if not, it had to irritate the hell out of Ike.that Nixon used the court of public opinion to essentially force him to keep Nixon on the ticket. ) Mr. Dreier, your comparison of Hillary's latest ploy to Nixon's Checkers speech is nothing short of brilliant. I wonder if Clinton aides will next drag sacks and sacks of letters from Hillary supporters onto the floor of the Senate a la Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
05:05 PM on 06/04/2008
Oh, thank you Professor Clapp for explaining why Senator Clinton's speech was pathetic.

Now, my wife only has a Masters from Mills - She didn't listen to Nixon's speech of September 23, 1952, howver she did listen and watch Senator Clinton's. Not being as learned as you, the poor dear actually praised the Senator's speech. By the way, she also thought that Senator Obama's speech was very gracious.

Geez, had she only accepted that scholarship out of UCLA to Jack Kemp U, instead of Mills, why she might have become ever sooooo much more intelligent. Plus, she might have been better at home schooling this old Jayhawk grad.