1/9/2008
So did the tears work?
Wow. Hillary pulls out a surprise victory. And McCain makes it not even close. The New York Times sets the stage well, as did many of the national news sources. Wisconsin amateur pundits take it from there – and do a darn good job.
From the New York Times: Clinton the surprise victor Several New Hampshire women, some of them undecided until Tuesday, said that a galvanizing moment for them had been Mrs. Clinton’s unusual display of emotion on Monday as she described the pressures of the race and her goals for the nation — a moment Mrs. Clinton herself acknowledged as a breakthrough.
“I come tonight with a very, very full heart, and I want especially to thank New Hampshire,” Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking to become the first woman to be elected president, told supporters in Manchester. “Over the last week, I listened to you, and in the process I found my own voice.”
If you’ve not seen the ABC footage of Hillary’s tear-up, watch it here. I can identify. Tearing up, especially when you’re tired. How does she avoid it? How has she avoided it until now? That said, I don’t buy the tearing up in the pizza parlor. Watch the eyes, the mouth. Looks like another Clinton staged moment to me. Mary, from Freedom Eden, does a great job talking about that new found voice of Hillary’s. I didn't realize that this brilliant woman with decades of experience had still been searching for a voice. How can one be experienced and ready to lead without command of one's voice?
Lance Burri has his own advice for Mrs. Clinton: I’d have advised her to do differently. You don’t cry, Hillary: you have Chelsea cry. During a speech, when she gets to the part about how much you care about this country. Then you, the wise and empathic mother, take her by the shoulders; lead her, sobbing, away (not so far that we can’t see you); speak softly but firmly, and send off for hot chocolate while you advance to the podium yourself.
There you go. I am the next Dick Morris.
Mike Plaisted says it wasn’t the tears at all – but a hug! I'm not sure the near-tears moment changed the dynamic all that much. I think a more defining moment may have been at a Hillary press conference earlier in the week. Chris Matthews used the opportunity as an excuse to ask her to appear on his show. "Yeah, right," she said and then said "I am always amazed by men who are obsessed with me." Matthews was still pleading that he wasn’t obsessed with her when she came up to him and gave him the ultimate Washington-insider hug and pat on the cheek. Matthews hasn’t been the same since – he has toned down his anti-Clinton rhetoric remarkably since that moment, and really had to eat it late tonight, when Clinton won and looked good doing it.
Michael Mathias, isn’t happy about this teary-eyed stuff. Look, do you have a problem with Clinton’s record? Fine. Trash her about that. But let’s not take down a candidate just because Frank Luntz can ask enough leading questions to get a restaurant-full of empty-headed New Hampshire voters to raise their hands.
Or because someone got slightly emotional during a long stretch of campaigning.
Rick Esenberg, the wise sage, says the rest of the (Democratic) campaign is all about Obama. What is this Change? What's revolutionary about him other than his multiply hyphenated identity?
He can be whatever you want, but if you cast yourself as everyone's mirror, you run the risk that someone will turn it back on you. Running as the "new kind of candidate" who "transcends the politics of the past" may win a primary or two, but it grows old fast.
Needless to say, tons of news and commentary about the New Hampshire primary. And we haven’t even touched on McCain’s win! (Christian Schneider did – it’s great, as usual.) Here’s a nice close – for now. Caffeinated Politics – on the way it used to be…. The 79-year-old man sitting alongside me on Tuesday night at our election gathering leaned over at one point as the returns for New Hampshire were coming in and said, “This is the way it used to be.” Knowing what he meant I grinned, and told him I much agreed.
There was a time before precision polling told us how we would vote before we ever cast a ballot, or exit polling had broken down the winners and losers along with the reasons why within minutes of a state closing their polls, that watching election returns after a hotly contested political battle was loads of fun….
It was as if we all stepped back in time for a bit. I wonder how many thought about a time not so long ago when all elections were so marvelous to watch unfold?
COMMENTS
Very nice as always.
Two comments:
1) I still don't fully understand why everyone is touting Clinton as a "surprise" victor. The only reason that is apparent is because the extreme northeast is an independent haven (Am I the only person that wants a bit more of that?) and thus is impossible to predict. If you live and die by the polls, Obama only pulled ahead after Iowa, before which Hillary held a solid double digit lead.
The lesson here is simple: the polls are junk and should be treated as such.
2) Did anyone else notice that Wyoming held their GOP Caucuses as well? Oh wait...with the lowest population density in the nation and since tumbleweeds can't vote I guess no one did. It did give Romney a moderate lead in the delegate count for now though.
I know, I know...I'm exacerbating the "horse race" mentality us politicos and the media perpetuate, but this is looking to be the most exciting race in many years.
Adam Delikowski (Wed Jan 09 09:15:31 2008)
I'm with you Adam - lovin' the horse race. Anxious for February 19 to come around...
Jo E. (Wed Jan 09 09:29:30 2008)
|
