The LuLac Edition #489, June 3rd, 2008

PHOTO INDEX: SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON AND FORMER PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER WHO MAKES HIS CHOICE IN THIS YEAR'S PRESIDENTIAL RACE.

And now, the end is near,

And so I face the final curtain.

My friends, I'll say it clear;

I'll state my case of which I'm certain.

I planned each charted course -

Each careful step along the byway,

And more, much more than this,

I did it my way.

THE HILLARY MISSION

It appears that Senator Clinton’s campaign is coming to an end. She may publicly deny it but with the news that a former President of her party, (not related to her) is endorsing her opponent and that darn, confounding math, well it’s clear the road to the White House has ended for the former first lady. It was a great, gallant, history making effort. And while there were miscues along the way, it is evident that she acquitted herself well in this campaign. Here’s my analysis as to why the campaign fell short:
1. Frontrunner. If American political history has taught us anything, it is the fact that being the front runner in a Presidential campaign is a dangerous place to be. Robert Taft in 1952, Edmund Muskie in 1972, George H.W. Bush in 1980, and Howard Dean in 2004. Those candidates were usurped by a more popular nominating choice. When Senator Clinton entered the race, her opposition was supposed to come from the Democratic right, moving her more to the left. Her campaign heralded the word “inevitability”. And maybe in the big states like Ohio and Pennsylvania that was true. But Presidential politics requires even front runners to tour the barns of Iowa and slosh through the snows of New Hampshire kissing the behinds of voters who in the general election count for less than 7 electoral votes. The Clinton campaign was unprepared for the emergence of a black candidate winning over voters in an overwhelmingly white state. Like Dwight Eisenhower, George McGovern, Ronald Reagan and John Kerry before him, Barack Obama played the part of the insurgent and got a great deal of punch from his win in Iowa. Iowa, the great decapitator of front runners. Wasn’t her fault, it just happened.
2. Organization. The problem with a front runner’s campaign is believe it or not, money. The Clinton campaign had tons of money that was misallocated and spent on things not essential to a campaign. When you pay a strategist 2 million bucks a year, you give that person or organization no incentive or sense of urgency. Win or lose, they walk away with a fat paycheck. And I’m sorry, Mark Penn was and is incompetent. Even a recently minted Government major from East Jesus State University would know that you have a contingency plan for what happens beyond Super Tuesday. Did they not remember Gary Hart on Walter Mondale’s tail in 1984 or the relentless Jerry Brown nipping at Bill Clinton’s heels in 1992? Local guys like Jim McNulty and Ed Mitchell could’ve schooled the Clinton team about the nuances of kissing up to the locals beyond Super Tuesday. And with all this money, why did they not develop a plan for the Caucus states? You can argue until you’re blue in the face that Kansas will never vote Democrat but the fact remains Obama won 11 contests in a short period of time winning about 160 delegates. That was when Obama overtook her in the delegate lead and that notion of “inevitability” crumbled. Perception being reality, the candidacy never recovered. Back to the money, there are reports that the massive misappropriation of funds by the Clinton campaign operatives border on fraud. Had there been prudent budgeting and spending, there should have been no reason in the world Senator Clinton had to loan her campaign money. Some of her staff did not serve her well.
3.Timing. What if Senator Clinton ran in 2004? President Bush was more than vulnerable but her people felt she needed to be more “seasoned” and “experienced”. After all she would have only been a Senator 4 years! How ironic she is being beaten by the man who gave the keynote speech at the 2004 convention and by a Senator with only half the time she had in if she had made the move in 2004. Think about it, no swift boating, a little more energy than John Kerry and an opportunity to maybe win Ohio despite the registration drive by the GOP. Timing in politics is everything and maybe 2004 was her time.
4. Mood. The mood of the country was resolute change. Big time. Senator Clinton was viewed as part of the past, the establishment. A part of the governing class. What better way to express contrasting change against George Bush than to pluck an articulate, thoughtful, intellectual black man who you might not want to have a beer with and compare him to the current occupant. As local state committeeman Bob Caruso told me in the spring, “There’s change and then there’s fundamental change. Obama’s type of change runs right up and punches Bush and the GOP in the nose!” Very true comments. Things are so bad in this country that it can be argued that the change Senator Clinton offered was not enough. Obama’s message resonated.
5. Strategy. The Obama people ran a better campaign. Period. They adopted a fifty state work plan, spent media money wisely and picked their spots. When it became clear that Senator Obama could not win a state, he went elsewhere and concentrated on where he could prevail. Leaner, smarter, better response time to issues like Rev. Wright. Plus, Democrats looked at how Obama ran his campaign and thought it might make him a better candidate or President.
6. Media bias. Obama charmed the national media and I have to tell you he did a masterful job. But there was a great deal of media bias against Senator Clinton. It came partly from the allure of Senator Obama’s novel candidacy and also from the fact that Clinton, whether she was a female or not was a front runner who needed to be cut down. It seemed like she never got a break, even on her good nights. She’d win a big state but then the competing story line was the delegate lead Obama was amassing. Plus, Senator Clinton has been around the block and the media, at least in my estimation would pick at every opportunity to blow a story out of proportion. Look at the Bobby Kennedy flap before Memorial Day weekend. Obama was the fresh new face, Clinton was last year’s prom date. It has to be galling and ironic that the glass ceiling for Presidential politics for women has not yet been broken. Once more, a man stood in the way. No matter his color or upbringing, he was still a male. And I think that no matter how liberal the national media is perceived, they’re not that as liberal as the right wingers would have us think.
7. Baggage. Senator Clinton sought to make her baggage a plus telling voters she didn’t need to be vetted. True. But there was the health care plan, the travel gate office, Vince Foster, Whitewater, all the things supposedly put to bed were still out there in the ether. And of course there was the former President who still might be an impediment to the chances of Senator Clinton becoming Vice President. The baggage helped in some instances but in some pretty close contests, it took its toll.
There you have it, the reasons why the Clinton campaign fell just short of the goal line. At least from my point of view.

VANITY FAIR AND BILL

I had the opportunity to read the story on the Vanity Fair website and even thought I’d post the link. But then I realized that the entire article had no concrete sources that were named. Everything in the article had an unnamed source. And in my two years of doing this site, I realized that even us lowly bloggers know you don’t do a devastating story without attribution to some source. Today the Hillary Clinton campaign apologized for President Clinton’s use of the word “scumbag” in characterizing the author Todd Purdam. They shouldn’t have.

OBAMA’S NIGHT

It is clear Senator Obama is well within reach of the nomination. Right now there is speculation about Senator Clinton becoming Vice President. The Obama staffers are fuming because they feel the talk is overshadowing their guy’s accomplishment. The Clinton people feel their person is entitled. As always (and this is one of the things I admire about Obama) the Illinois Senator is keeping his counsel and balancing out the more fervent voices of his team while Senator Clinton is downplaying her ambitions for the spot, at least publicly. Get the two candidates in a room together and have them ask and answer these questions:
1. Can we run together?
2. How do we control the staffs so totally loyal to us?
3. What type of role do you imagine as being part of the team?
4. Will the former President Clinton release all financial information on contributions to his library? Will he give up making speeches for money to avoid conflicts of interest?
5. How do we govern?

MAKING UP

When the Vice presidency is offered to a vanquished rival, it is amazing how fast hurt feelings are healed. Examples:
John Nancy NANCE (corrected 060408) Garner who opposed FDR in 1932, Lyndon Johnson who ran against John Kennedy in 1960, George H.W. Bush in 1980 accepting Ronald Reagan’s nod and John Edwards in 2004 accepting a spot on John Kerry’s team.