The following is RJ Eskow's piece reacting to the Democratic Primary debate in Austin, Texas, last February:
For the first time in quite a while we saw a clear winner emerge from one of the many Democratic presidential debates. That winner? The Democratic Party. Finally after a dark and long winter came a glimmer of light, a possibility that this party could emerge from its bitter primary season united and uplifted. And the person who deserves the most thanks for that glimmer of possibility is Hillary Clinton.
Not that she got there by the most direct route possible. Before ending on a grace note, Sen. Clinton tried a few pre-rehearsed cheap shots. But it seemed apparent from the start tonight that she was determined, first and foremost, to tone down the harsh rhetoric. That impression was borne out by a post-debate anecdote from panel member John King, who said that she approached Obama before the debate to engage him in some friendly casual conversation.
For most of the debate it seemed as if two Senator Clintons were taking turns on the stage. One, the statesmanlike leader, wanted to rise above petty divisions. The other, the one who thinks that going negative is "the fun part," wanted to keep taking shots. But the night's only boos (that I heard) came when she overplayed her weak "plagiarism" hand and delivered an obviously pre-scripted line about "change you can xerox."
It was like watching behavior modification take place in real-time. She was punished for going negative and rewarded for being uplifting, and you could watch her moving toward the light as the night wore on. As a result, when the debate ended she had the best moment of her entire campaign. That's when she said she was "honored" to be sharing the debate stage with Sen. Obama and spoke about her own motivation for public service, illustrating her remarks with an anecdote about wounded soldiers.
(I'll leave it to the snarky CNN post-debate analysts to point out that she appropriated a line without attribution herself, from Sen. John Edwards -- the notion that "we (the candidates) will be fine, whatever happens.")
Sen. Clinton's only hope for survival lies in sticking with this positive and unifying tone, but even then it will take some extraordinary luck. For, while she had a fine moment at the end, the debate as a whole was a draw. She needed a clear win to change the momentum. And Sen. Obama accomplished something extremely important tonight, too: He presented himself as a convincing president and commander-in-chief. That was the last thing he needed to do to 'close the deal' with a number of voters, and he succeeded.
Still, if Clinton manages to pull off a miracle this will be the moment when it began. And if she doesn't, which is more likely, this will be the moment when she telegraphed the fact that she's not willing to tear the party apart in pursuit of her own ambitions.
Some observers thought she was making a valedictory statement, gracefully acknowledging the inevitability of her own defeat. I think it was more nuanced than that. I think she still hopes for a win, but accepts the possibility of loss and wanted to address either eventuality with more grace and poise.
It made me wonder how her campaign might have gone had she not been given (and accepted) so much bad advice. There were reports this week that Mark Penn wanted her to go even more negative than she has so far. That approach would have been catastrophic tonight. And it made me think of Bill Clinton's advice to John Kerry in 2004, that he come out in favor of those anti-gay state amendments in order to undercut the right. I wonder how many of her greatest mistakes, including her 2002 war vote and her subsequent refusal to acknowledge it was a mistake, came from men like Penn and her husband.
I also wonder how many of her highly counterproductive "street fighter" moves came from Bill or Penn. Those moves have allowed Obama to undercut her with deft jujitsu over and over, as he did tonight, by painting them (and her) as "the old way of doing politics." She's a far stronger candidate when she taps the idealism theme herself instead of belittling it, and when she drops the pre-scripted attack lines to speak about her own dreams and motivations.
(And I felt strongly she should do that as far back as two months ago - even before she opened up emotionally in New Hampshire, which saved her candidacy then.)
But that was the campaign that might have been, not the campaign that was. And when you're running for president of the United States, you're the one who has to take responsibility for any advice you choose to follow.
Can she still turn this race around at this late date and win? It's possible, but it's certainly still a long shot. Either way, by the end of the night she rose above her worst instincts (and/or her some bad advice) to comport herself with class and dignity. In doing that, she did her party -- and herself -- a genuine service.
A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
Future-While-U-Wait
RJ Eskow at the Huffington Post
Follow RJ Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow
Clinton raised it tactically, in order to attempt to frame Obama as having sympathies that she knows he does not actually have--and Obama answered in with honesty, grace, and relaxed humor.
He knows who he is and what he believes. A tactical, reactive response--based on fear--was not necessary.
Obama--substantive and solid.
If you haven't been to an Obama rally, or want to take it with you as we get closer to decision day, you can find the entire Obama rally setlist--from "City of Blinding Lights" to which he takes the stage to "Signed, Sealed, Delivered"--the entire setlist!--on Itunes, here:
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewIMix?id=273867065&s=143441&v0=575
and feel proud (including his wife, for the first time in her life as an American) of having a black man get as far as he has gotten in this nomination, when a black man has never been this successful in an election before. However, if it weren't for the white corporations and Wall Street, becoming the main donors to his campaign from the beginning raising in less than a year over $100 million dollars, so that his campaign could hire as many people as possible to help him win the nomination. Obama brags about the donations from the grass roots, but in fact most of the money came from big business, Insurance, Oil etc. Obama is a corporate Democrat, which Hillary Clinton is accused of being, taking money from lobbyiest and Pacs, Obama gave up the lobbyiest for his presidential run, but in fact did not when he ran in Illinois, so it's only been since one year ago, he gave up lobbyiest. His proposed healthcare plan, is something his Wall Street buddies probably approve of because it is not Universal and leaves out a lot people, so that they get stuck with a bill not the companies they work for, if they happen to get sick. Most people don't want to get insurance, unless they have too, but let's face it it is a
neccesity for all, whether you think you need it or not, we all get sick.
Many black christians support Farrakhan, remember the 1 million man march, you do you really think they were black muslims, WAKE UP up, they all weren't. Obama doesn't really reject Farrakhan, that's why he had to be coached by Hillary, inside he is proud Farrakhan is bringing in more voters for him. Why aren't you people supporting this guy realistic.
stronly believe that Hillary is the kind of person we need during these awful times.
There is no question that when a President gets to the White House, there is a MONTHS LONG learning curve. We can niether afford this with Obama at this time AND DESERVE someone like Hillary WHO, Unlike our current Infomercialist in Chief DOES NUANCE!
Frankly I think what the Repubs will do instead is cross over to vote FOR Hillary, since they know Obama is a much stronger candidate. They'd rather see McCain face Hillary in November.
do you think Obama is getting so many voters and McCain is getting so little by comparasion even in the mostly white states. WAKE UP
There is a world of difference between Bush and Obama. Bush's presidency hasn't been disastrous because of his lack of experience. It has been disastrous because he got nothing out of the experience he DID have. It has more to do with laziness, arrogance and ignorance than it does experience. If you're going to vote for Clinton because of some perceived similarities between Obama and Bush, I'd beg you to actually do some homework.
My name is Maureen, too!
Looks like people named that are smart.
Let's say a middle-aged man dropped his suitcase while running across an intersection. And out popped sex magazines and paraphernalia of every description.
How many Americans would be shocked to discover that the man was Bill Clinton?
I am tired of the tawdry, the soap opera and the personal issues that are part of the Hillary and "Bill in a China Shop" show.
Remember when certain sexual acts were not acceptable subjects when talking to strangers?
Remember when alone actually meant alone?
The trashing of the English language, the increasing coarseness of public discourse are all part of the Billary legacy.
When I see Barack and Michelle together, the love and respect is palpable.
When I see Hillary and "Bill in the China Shop" together I really do not know what I am seeing - what is palpable is the feeling of revulsion.
Please God or whoever is out there, deliver us from the Clintons, once and for all!
The issues that matter are the economy, getting out of Iraq, stopping torture, investing in America again. Please don't get distracted by such nonsense.
when companies need to make changes, they hire
a qualified, experienced individual, who knows
how to make the changes "happen"., they don't hire the youngest, most inexperienced individual... because they don't have time for "on-the-job training". Does America have
time for on-the-job training?
Hillary CAN fake being compassionate, if it's for under an hour, and it's to people whose vote she desperately needs.
Just like Obama FAKED his position on NAFTA and LIED to the American Public, with the sweetest - purest look on his face? Try explaining it please. It was ALL over CTV News - (Canada's National News)
The Obama camp contacted the Canadians - both before and after the debate.. to let them know that what he was going to say about NAFTA - in public and at the last debate - was to be disregarded! That is was a tool to get himself elected.
It's becoming more and more evident the public desperately needs Hillary as President. More and more of Obama's posturing, is surfacing, in spite of US Media's attempts to downplay and ignore them. This one will be tough to do, because even Canada is now plainly concerned about Obama's ability to tell the truth!
Wow he's going to be more frightening that Bush.
We are not a corporation, but a citizenry. I have hope that one day soon we will realize this.
Phrasing abraham Lincoln, if the country wants another leader, i respect their judgement.
He says it beautifully. I was too lazy to look it up.
so, good for political unity, and good on the writer who was able to see it and then so clearly show us.
We are not there. that's why we have to trust you.
Yet the very next day she is out on the stump going negative. Please, don't you understand that your candidacy is dead. Don't rail against the dying of the light, embrace it, go quietly into that dark light and help heal our nation. There is a lot of work to do.
She spent 30 MILL10N DOLLARS AND HER OPPONENT HAD $350,000 to spend in her last NY campaign. She didn't even get as many voters and Schumer in his last run in NYS. This is the first time she has had a strong opponent and she ran a lousy campaign....
I truly wish Obama supporters wouldn't be so full of venom when speaking about Hillary on this website. Look...your guy is going to win the nomination...he's going to win it over a very qualified, knowledgable, and competent female leader. And, he will win the nomination NOT based on his original ideas or his supposed leadership qualities, but because he is not a Clinton...because he is "the new guy", who can fulfill whatever hopes and dreams people have, simply because he has so much of a blank slate to project on to. I wish Obama supporters would sit down, finally, and revel in your victory, and stop, once and for all, with your constant belittling of Hillary Clinton. It serves no purpose at this point, other than to drive Clinton supporters further away.
With more CLOSED primaries, Hillary will win more states, and more votes.
As for the SUPERdelegates, Obama is digging into his HUGE moneybag that he has over Hillary, and has spent about 400,000 to BUY the superdelgates as opposed to Hillary, who has spent 190,000.
There are two major reasons Obama has "won" these "open" fly-over, smaller states (many, to be sure).
1. You've got a lot of republicans going to the open caucases and primaries who will (and have) quickly switch back to republican by November to vote GOP. They have NO intention of voting for Obama in the general election.
They wanted the weakest Dem. candidate to be the nominee. Weakest on experience, weakest on foregion policy, weakest on national security, weakest voting record in the U.S. senate. (40 votes "present")
2. The overwhelming support of the media, squirming an squealing at his every word, every appearance, like a teenage schoolgirl; jumping to his defense everytime he makes a gaffe, states something untrue or just plain stupid; while slicing , dicing, maiming, insulting, and even making up things that aren't true about Hillary.
We still have a ways to go. Don't riot in the streets and start firebombing and attacking people when Hillary gets the nomination, like you did when they read the verdict on the Rodney King beating by the white policemen.
She spent 30 MILL10N DOLLARS AND HER OPPONENT HAD $350,000 to spend in her last NY campaign. She didn't even get as many voters and Schumer in his last run in NYS. This is the first time she has had a strong opponent and she ran a lousy campaign....
While I am an Obama supporter and find the "plagiarism" issue to be indeed "silly season," and for the most part also, I support the theme and tone of your piece, being parenthetically snarky, and pointing something out by saying you aren't going to point it out, is still being snarky, and still pointing it out.
he was stealing feels, at the same time not giving credit to his democratic competition for quoting him. That candidate was John Edwards. He has since been asked Obama to carry on some of the issues close to John Edwards' heart like bring attention to 47 million people in this country living below the poverty level, so far Obama has said little regarding the have nots, I guess their donations to his campaign aren't big enough.
Obama the copy cat corporate democrat.
Obama will be creamed if he runs against the Republican party. They which hunt and have no problems doing so. All in the name of God too.
Hillary has been subject to that witch hunt and she knows what to expect. She is saying is "Look, I have been there, and I know what you say you can't do that easily". She has been in vairous commitees that allows her to see up front what is going on with the war. She knows the mistakes first had with that whole ordeal. She has been closer to "the front" on that. She knows what Obama is saying, but she also knows that he doesn't really have the "front view" experience.