Grace Note
As an Obama supporter who deeply distrusts the Clintons, I have to grant that the speech Sen. Clinton gave a few minutes ago really couldn't have been better. Justifiable pride in her campaign's accomplishments gave way to a strong endorsement of her erstwhile rival, and then a broad-based substantive case for why her former backers should give their allegiance and votes and energies to electing Obama in November. I guess if I were to quibble, a line or two about McCain--something to the effect that he's an honorable public servant whose positions nonetheless would be disastrous for the country--might have been welcome. But that's a small point in an outstanding speech--one that showed just how much better a politician Clinton has become over the course of the campaign. I'd always appreciated her mastery of policy detail and grudgingly admired her resilience and indefatigable (albeit at times delusional) approach. But today for the first time it became clear that the "growth as a candidate" the pundits keep talking about is real, and has more positive manifestations than, say, willingness to embrace a brain-dead pseudo-populism on a question like the Gas Tax Holiday.
My guess is that the speech will play well with one group of Clinton supporters--the emotionally invested feminists who will conclude that on the issues, Obama and the Democrats are so far preferable to McCain and the Republicans that they would come home, sooner or later, anyway. But the explicit appeal probably will speed that process and maybe boost their level of investment in Obama's success. I'm not sure, though, that she reached the second group: those "hard-working whites" who just felt more comfortable with Clinton, whether because of brand loyalty, economic arguments, style points, or bigotry. Meanwhile, I read on TPM that the McCain campaign will make a play for Clinton voters based on those same atmospheric/cultural arguments. It should be interesting to see whether economic self-interest (the old core Democratic argument to the voters in play, if you believe as most do that feminist-motivated Clinton supporters probably will come home to the Dem) trumps that Scary Black Guy/Thinks-He's-Better-Than-You ("Hyde Park academic") factor. Also if Obama tries to turn the tables and point out that McCain isn't exactly Mr. Blue-Collar by birth, marriage, or lifestyle.
Ironically it's hard to imagine a better potential surrogate for Obama pushing back against that Republican appeal than Bill Clinton. But I don't know if Obama would ask, and I don't know if the former president would accept, that assignment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I am watching Hillary's speech on the internet now. I am glad she is making the speech, but I'm not sure I agree it couldn't be much better. She spent a fair amount of time attacking Republican presidents and positions - something that Obama has impressed me by his ability to refrain from doing so. The truth of the matter, I believe, is that many of the most important issues facing the country are much more complex than either party makes it out to be, especially while it demonizes the other party. Obama seems to stand more more for binding together our common aspirations into policies that are fairer and work better for everyone than what we have today. Hillary is a more of a fighter, Obama more of a bridge-maker - and his ability to remain so in the face of all of his adversaries so far is, I believe, one of the many reasons he is the nominee.
I will admit, however, that hearing Hillary say, "Yes we can!" gave me chills - as much of "chills" as I can feel on a 93-degree muggy day, at any rate. :-)
Frato
Obama seems to stand more more for binding together our common aspirations into policies that are fairer and work better for everyone than what we have today. Hillary is a more of a fighter, Obama more of a bridge-maker - and his ability to remain so in the face of all of his adversaries so far is, I believe, one of the many reasons he is the nominee.
I agree with this. But in terms of her immediate political task--to bring the maximum number of people who supported her in the primaries to Obama in November--drawing those clear contrasts is, I think, the only way to proceed. Personally (and I hope this is clear on the blog) I have little problem with John McCain; I think he's kind of a cool guy. But on policy grounds--the collective societal expression of those common aspirations you note--his are very different than Obama's, and the Clintons are maybe the best people in the country to articulate those differences to the chunk of the electorate Obama most needs to reach.
And while "demonizing the other party" is inevitably somewhat in the eye of the beholder, and I don't think Clinton went overboard in doing that today, it's also a pretty good description of what a vice-presidential candidate is expected to do. While I strongly oppose her getting that gig, and I honestly wonder how much she really wants it, that could provide a motivation.
In any event, keep the fans running ;)
Post a Comment