Ground Reporting From NH

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:13:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Todd Beeton of MYDD is on the ground in New Hampshire and providing some excellent reporting. Here is his report from a Clinton event in Nashua:

More....

Hillary Clinton took the stage and I have to say, you'd never know she didn't win last night. The word unflappable comes to mind. The event was half rally, half townhall meeting where she, after making the case for herself generally, addressed her solutions to issues from bringing the troops home, to healthcare to ending our dependence on foreign oil and seemed to have a full stump speech for each issue. It was actually very impressive.
The case for her candidacy that she's making breaks down to two questions: 1. "Who will be the best president on day one?" and 2. "Who will best be able to withstand the Republican attack machine to get elected in the first place?" Nothing we haven't heard before, but the framing felt different. There was MUCH more change rhetoric and a lot less experience rhetoric, but the subtext (and sometimes the text) of the entire event was very much about experience. As the chant said, it's about being READY to lead and so she is asking New Hampshire, actually, challenging New Hampshire, to scrutinize the track records of both her and Barack Obama (yes, from her perspective, she has one obstacle to the nomination and one alone) to judge who'll bring about change in the future by looking at the change they've brought in the past. In other words, if the Clinton camp has anything to say about it, we may be in for far more scrutiny of Obama's record.
. . . [S]he played up that she's been "the most vetted, the most investigated and it turns out, the most innocent." (Again, a reference to her experience without saying the word.) She also boasted of her ability to win over Republicans and Independents in New York. I suspect Clinton will be addressing this much more over the next 5 days. Also expect her to co-opt some of Obama's post-partisan language -- today she actually said she doesn't like "red state/blue state" language, "we are one country..." . . .

Some good and some bad there from Hillary imo. Appropriating the unity schtick is a terrible mistake. It will not work. She needs a different gear it seems to me. She will not win Independents against Obama. She needs McCain to do that. She needs to go partisan.

< The Demise Of The Broder/Bloomberg Movement | Obama's Broad Appeal In Iowa >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Ground Reporting From NH | 29 comments (29 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Clinton need to drop the victim (none / 0) (#1)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:29:10 PM EST

meme and emphasize that, if elected, she will withdraw from Iraq, work hard to persaude Cngress kto send her universal health care, fair tax structure, etc.

Note: Obama was wearing a blue (not purple) tie last night. Why did it require five talking heads plus a moderator to comment on his speech?

ditto (none / 0) (#4)
by Jgarza on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:36:31 PM EST

1. "Who will be the best president on day one?" and 2. "Who will best be able to withstand the Republican attack machine to get elected in the first place?"

Point one seems useless if people NH are voting on change.

Point two makes her seem weaker, she is still claiming she is the victim of republicans. this is her excuse for everything. I know it rallies bloggers, but at some point you have, take responsibility for yourself. She is sounds like a bunch of excuses.


If they are voting on change (none / 0) (#8)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:50:01 PM EST

She loses.

If she can argue that she has the experience to make the change, then she can hold her own.

And if they worry that Obama is not ready on Day 1, then she can win.

As for point 2, I think it is not only true, I think it resonates.

My own response to 2 is I would rather have the Media Darling in the race than the one who is getting beat up by the Media.


I don't believe your point 2 for a second. (none / 0) (#14)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:02:05 PM EST

YOU selling out to the media?


all else is prettymuch equal (none / 0) (#23)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:21:40 PM EST

Heck, Obama is better on the issues with me than Clinton.


: By tomorrow, I may agree. Not today. (none / 0) (#24)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:26:47 PM EST

Turn Media Darling on Its Head (none / 0) (#15)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:04:42 PM EST

She will hit Obama harder in NH. If Obama - and his people - respond with complaint as they've done in the past, then I think she needs to hit him again, basically calling him a whiner who can't take a punch. Basically, suggest his problem is that he believes his own press, but when they turn on him, he's not going to be able to take the punch or know how to fight back.

But, really, not ready on Day 1 and, relatedly, not experienced enough to make change are her best arguments against Obama and New Hampshire is the place to make it. People will now be deciding whether they can see him as president. My mother, who is agnostic in the primary and likes Obama fine, mentioned this morning that he seemed "green." It's this doubt that she needs to try to exploit and do it now before people become comfortable with the idea of President Obama.

And, it's not clear yet, whether change will be as popular with New Hampshire voters as it was with Iowa. It may be, but we don't know that yet.


: Um (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:08:23 PM EST

Could I use the word basically more? Basically, no.

Her biggest problem... (none / 0) (#2)
by Dadler on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:33:16 PM EST

...and Bill's as well, and I can't repeat this enough about virtually all the candidates, is an almost pathological lack of imagination and creativity.

That's Why (none / 0) (#19)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:11:30 PM EST

I think her getting outside the bubble and making herself more available in NH is very smart. She's basically a control freak, I'm one myself so I sympathize, and she can't change that, but she can show a bit more of herself to voters, be a bit looser. In addition to revving up supporters, it would probably get a bit better press coverage. They always seem amazed when she acts human.


She looked very "human" (none / 0) (#21)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:15:58 PM EST

working the room last night. Also, watching a Clinton campaign appearance in NH on C-Span surprised me. She was giving thoese mini-stump speeches on each of the crucial issues, then she took questions from the floor and responded with substance to each, then she moved among the attendees, shaking hands, making eye contact. Well done. Obama's C-Span event in NH, on the other hand, emphasized the environment, which seemed to be why people showed up.


: In person (none / 0) (#22)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:21:19 PM EST

she's very impressive. I've seen her a couple of times. You'd think from her public persona that she wouldn't be comfortable one-on-one, but that's exactly wrong. She's much better that way than on the stump, IMO.
If I were here, I'd seriously think about having a townhall event in Manchester, let anyone in and have them ask her questions. Bill could be the moderator. Talking about details and interacting with individuals is when she's at her best. Plus, I think she'd get a huge boost by doing it.

If I were advising Clinton (none / 0) (#3)
by andgarden on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:36:12 PM EST

I'd tell her to start running against Mike Huckabee.

John McCain (none / 0) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:47:51 PM EST

Sorta like the Republicans ran against her (none / 0) (#7)
by andgarden on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:49:41 PM EST

maybe. . .

I think Huckabee works better for New Hampshire: beat Obama at his own game. I know you think that can't work.


: McCain (none / 0) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:51:08 PM EST

Why? To show how she can run better against him in the GE.
Also might help McCain hold on to Indys vs. Obama.

Yep (none / 0) (#9)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:50:58 PM EST

Democrats are scared of John McCain. Of all the candidates, I know he scares me the most. I particularly shudder at the thought of six months of him hitting Obama on experience.

Elevating McCain might strengthen him in NH. It could also put the issue of experience and electability in more real terms instead of as abstract concepts.

Huckabee is a joke who loses to any Dem nominee. I am not scared of him in the least. Scared of the evil forces he might unleash, maybe, but not that he might win.


Exactly (none / 0) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:51:57 PM EST

Have folks imagine a GE Obama v. McCain on the experience question.


: Yep (none / 0) (#17)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:06:59 PM EST

She needs to make the experience issue real and not just in theory. Saying experience doesn't matter as much as change generally is one thing, saying it won't matter in trying to beat John McCain is an entirely different matter.

The problem with McCain (none / 0) (#12)
by andgarden on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:53:56 PM EST

is that he's a real threat. Hucakbee might be, and I think Hillary might be smart to build him up.


: The problem is (none / 0) (#13)
by andgarden on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:54:37 PM EST

does she really want to help McCain? I'm not sure any Democrat can beat him.

Maybe not (none / 0) (#26)
by Joe Bob on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:43:12 PM EST

From my own perspective as a Democrat, I see McCain as the least insane of the GOP field. That said, I think he has some high negatives.

I can't recall the source of this particular poll, but it asked people what sort of person they would be willing to elect as President. All of the types represented one of the presidential candidates, as well as some 'controversial' traits like homosexuality or atheism. So, they asked: Would you vote for: a woman, an African American, a Latino-American, Mormon, Jew, etc. One of the other questions they asked was: Would you vote for someone over 70 years old (aka: McCain). Based on that criterion he's more popular than gays and atheists, but that's about it.

The other thing is that McCain is more closely aligned with Bush on the Iraq war than any other candidate. Iraq is off the front page right now because of the brilliant progress represented by The Surge, but it is still the #1 issue for plenty of voters. Make it clear that if McCain were President we would still have a major presence in Iraq through at least 2012, and possibly 2016, and the shine comes off McCain pretty quickly.


Don't give up on independents (none / 0) (#5)
by dk on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 01:44:49 PM EST

I disagree with BTD slightly on this. I think that Hillary can appeal to independents. Not necessarily by the substance of her policies (which, frankly, in domestic issues are mostly to the left of Obama, and in foreign policy issues are essentially the same as Obama's) but by making the argument that she is a more thoughtful decision-maker than he is generally (i.e. while his decisions are motivated by vague notions of "hope" and "faith," she makes decisions based on facts, deliberative analytical reasoning etc).

You can argue how true this actually is, but I think it's a valid argument to make, and at points in the campaign it seemed as if it was actually a winning argument to many independents.

Problem is, she has made a couple (none / 0) (#16)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:04:46 PM EST

decisions, that, no matter how reasoned, are just plain wrong.


original sin (none / 0) (#27)
by Joe Bob on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:51:49 PM EST

The original sin of the 2008 Democratic primary is whether or not you voted for the war in Iraq. Clinton and Edwards both suffer the taint of this, which make them default second choices for lots of people. Either they were fools for buying the WMD line of bull from Bush, or they made the cynical calculation to disassociate themselves from the dirty f@%^ing hippie wing of the party.

I was on the fence between Obama and Edwards until quite recently. I would gladly vote for either one but Iraq is a pretty decisive tie-breaker when it comes to making a choice in the primary.


: But, I notice Clinton isn't (none / 0) (#28)
by oculus on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:53:49 PM EST

included in your second paragraph. Must be lots more than the AMUF vote.

Great Line (none / 0) (#20)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:14:13 PM EST

This?

"the most vetted, the most investigated and it turns out, the most innocent."

Is a great line. Obama can't dispute it without risking a backlash among democrats. And it not only goes to her argument about experience, it also reminds voters of the baseless attacks she and Bill got in the 1990s and that the next Democratic President will probably face the same thing.

Still not buyin' it (none / 0) (#25)
by Joe Bob on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 02:29:11 PM EST

Among the Democratic contenders, Hillary Clinton is the third choice or lower with almost every liberal Democrat I know personally. The general consensus is that another Clinton presidency means eight more years of gutless, DLC-style triangulation and incremental change. When she says 'READY' or 'experienced' that's exactly what it reminds me of. Who cares if she's ready, if you don't care for the agenda she's ready to push?

Her whole campaign has left a bad taste in my mouth from the very beginning, chiefly because of the 'inevitability' subtext. I took it as: Hillary is the establishment candidate and you better get on board because we'll steamroll you with political strongarming and boatloads of money anyway.

: The Inevitablility Thing (none / 0) (#29)
by BDB on Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 03:17:27 PM EST

was utter crap. Terrible idea. The media always bring you down, even if you're not a Clinton. Voters hate it. It was never going to work and they were stupid for trying it.
While it's less likely she'll be the nominee now, if she is, she'll be a better one for it, IMO. Just as Obama will be a better one if he's forced to show he can replicate his Iowa turnout and convince people he has the experience needed to be President. This fight can be good for the Democratic party, even if it's not much fun now.
It's the opposite of the Republican fight this year, they're just ripping each other to shreds.