MotherJones Blog: In New Hampshire, Hillary Finds It Tough To Dash Obama's Hope

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

In New Hampshire, Hillary Finds It Tough To Dash Obama's Hope

The battle of New Hampshire—on the Democratic side—opened Friday morning with an obvious question: what, if anything, would Hillary Clinton do differently? Her 8-point loss to Barack Obama in Iowa was a clear indicator that what she had been doing until then was not working. And when it comes to the sort of voters who contributed to Obama's impressive win on Thursday night—including independent, young, and upscale voters—New Hampshire is a better hunting ground for Obama than Iowa. So reporters and politicos were wondering how Clinton would recalibrate in response to the thumpin' she had received.

Early in the morning, in a cold airport hangar in Nashua, in front of a couple of hundred people (including Arkansans and AFSCME union workers who were bussed in), Clinton provided the answer: not much. In her only major campaign appearance of the day (she would later join the other Democratic candidates at a dinner for the state Democratic party), she essentially stuck with the message that had failed her in Iowa.

Before she took the stage with husband Bill (who looked somewhat somber) and daughter Chelsea, the crowd chanted "ready for change, ready to lead." Her husband gave a short introduction notable for what he did not say. Sixteen years ago, in the days prior to the 1992 New Hampshire primary, his candidacy was on the ropes due to the report that he had engaged in an extramarital affair with Gennifer Flowers. He ended up placing second in New Hampshire (behind former Senator Paul Tsongas, the near-favorite son from next door in Massachusetts) and immodestly declared himself the "comeback kid." During his introduction this morning—and during Hillary's subsequent remarks—there was no recognition that once again the Clintons were looking to New Hampshire to save them.

Instead, Clinton delivered, in B-plus (at best) manner, her generic stump speech: she has experience and she would be ready to go as president on Day One. She took a few of the usual pokes at Obama, noting "we need a president who won't just call for change... but a president who will produce change." She said voters should not make a "leap of faith" in selecting a nominee. She did shift one of her rhetorical standards. Instead of offering herself as ready to lead, she declared she was ready to win. Noting that she has been pursued by conservative antagonists for years, she maintained she was the candidate best "able to withstand the Republican attack machine." She added, "The one thing you know about me after 16 years of taking all their incoming fire, I am still here."

The message: they will crush Obama, so you better vote for me.

That's not very inspirational. But what else does she have to offer? She has been making the experience argument for a year, and Iowa Democrats said, thanks, but no thanks. There are no profound policy differences between her and Obama that she can exploit. Toward the end of the event, in response to a question from the crowd, she maintained that she was quite electable in red states, pointing out that ten Democratic senators have endorsed her. But given what happened in Iowa the night before, this was not the best time for her to be making an electability argument. (Remember, 70 percent of the Democratic caucus-goers in Iowa spurned her.)

Clinton may have no choice but to keep repeating what did not work in Iowa. She could try to attack Obama directly. But when she previously has gone on the offensive it has backfired. And tearing into the party's new Bobby Kennedy could be perilous. Her presentation in the airport hangar indicated her campaign has made the strategic decision to keep with its preexisting game plan and hope to best Obama if not in New Hampshire than in subsequent rounds.

Arrogance? Denial? The only choice she and her crew have? At the end of the event, her chief aides, who were roaming the hangar, did not hang around to talk to (that is, work) the reporters, as so often happens at campaign functions. Maybe they had no spin to offer.

Hours later, Obama triumphantly appeared in a crowded gymnasium at Concord High School. The room was packed with students (who were allowed to cut classes to attend) and several hundred adults. Unlike the Clinton event, there was energy in the room. While Clinton supporters had clapped for her in the hangar, audience members at the Obama event screamed for their man. The passion differential was stark.

Obama, too, stuck with his routine speech. But now he had victory on his side. Since the start of his campaign, he had put forward a theory: there are voters who yearn for a different kind of politics. Over the months, he did put out progressive policy proposals, and he voiced his opposition to the war. But he added to all this a call for transcending the political divisions of America. If we can change the nature of politics, we can change the nature of the government, Obama said. He was offering voters something more than the usual Democratic positions. And he presented his desire for this change as a qualification for office. Moreover, he said, he was not merely mounting a candidacy, he was serving a cause that voters could join by supporting him. There was no telling if this could work. Until Iowa. Yes, the hunger that Obama claimed there was does seem to exist. And, yes, he was the answer—at least for a plurality of caucus-goers.

In the Concord High gym, Obama noted that he had been vindicated. He asked New Hampshire voters not to listen to those who would urge them not "to trust your own gut and feelings." He warned that there will be critics who will say that "Obama has not been in Washington long enough. He needs to be seasoned and stewed. We need to boil all the hope out of him." The audience laughed along. The "real gamble," he added, was relying on the "same old folks" in Washington (read: the Clintons). He said he was well prepared to deal with the "operatives who will try to tear me down." But, he added, "I'm not interested in them. I'm interested in you."

He spoke eloquently of the power of hope, citing hope as the motivation for the colonists who fought for independence, the abolitionists who fought to end slavery, the "greatest generation" that fought to defeat fascism during World War II, the unions that fought for the 40-hour work week and a minimum wage, the women who fought for the right to vote, and the civil rights workers who fought for equality. "That's what hope is," he said. "Imagining and then fighting... to create what wasn't there before, what the cynics say wasn't possible." He declared there is "a moment in every generation when that spirit has to come through. This is that moment."

It was heady stuff, a politician comparing his candidacy to American independence, World War II, and the civil rights movement. But Obama, who today reeked of the confidence that comes from being a winner, connected with the audience. He certainly can brag he connected with Iowan voters. Hillary's practical case—I have way more experience working in Washington and fighting off those Republican meanies—doesn't answer the inspirational argument Obama presents. The two are operating on different planes. She's selling vegetables; he's selling a vision. And the buyers in Iowa made a choice.

At the moment, it seems as if she cannot compete with him on these terms. How she can fight hope remains an unanswered question.

Shane

Posted by: Shane Dresen on 01/04/08 at 3:29 PM Respond

Obama may or may not win this thing, but he certainly has made history. I'm riding him as long as he's in this.

He is certain to be attacked from all sides now that he is the "frontrunner", but from my experience in Virginia in '89 (Wilder), how he takes those punches will tell even more about him than the final results in New Hampshire.

Posted by: Egalitare on 01/04/08 at 5:27 PM Respond

Yes,Is a vision what Obama offer,and the response of the people is like a dance.He is puting a music in politics and directing a national pachanga that sound very good to a lot of americans of every social status.In his candidacy you see pasion.The rest of the candidates bore, They are like mechanical puppets outdated.

Posted by: lovingusaresident on 01/04/08 at 5:53 PM Respond

I have Hillary getting crushed in New Hampshire. Obama and Edwards are the clear winners! She is in big, big touble. The media has hyped her. This is the only reason she had any popularity at all. She can't call what is happending to her a Vast Right Wing Conspriacy this time! The American people caught on. She is crap and everyone knows it. The media is the only group in love witht he wanabe.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/04/08 at 6:20 PM Respond

Blue:

Chelsea refused to speak to a 9 year old reporter. I am so tired of hearing how smart the Clinton's are. Their daughter was not smart enough to know the difference between Sean Hannity and a 9 year old girl trying learn something. These people make me sick.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/04/08 at 6:25 PM Respond

Nicely done David. It is all about charisma and vision now. During the interims of history, party apparatchiks can keep the wheels of bureaucracy grinding.

But there are times of political and social stress that require a visionary. The hunger for change is America's expression of that desire for a MLK, JFK or Bobby Kennedy.

Go Obama.

Naldo

Posted by: Naldo on 01/04/08 at 9:28 PM Respond

The Clintons are going to pull there slash and burn tactic. Obama has to hit back hard, if she hits first. Also, pont out her campaigns desperation. But under no circumstance should he jsut sit back and let an attack go unanswered. At the same time he responds to the attack, he should also appeal to the voters to hold her accountable for the negative campaigning and failure to provide vision for the future. Good Luck Barack. We are with you!!

Posted by: Joe on 01/04/08 at 9:35 PM Respond

Posted by: Joe on 01/04/08 at 9:36 PM Respond

My apologies for the multiple post, thought it did not go through first time.

Posted by: Joe on 01/04/08 at 9:37 PM Respond

I agree, media in this nation has been made into a new form of campaigning. Shows that are run by people with political interest are called upon to cover some candidates more than others. Publicity equals popularity.
The media is now forced to report on the will of the nation. Bravo to the good people of Iowa.
I am proud to be an American.

Posted by: Tony Adams on 01/05/08 at 12:40 AM Respond

I disagree, Joe, about Obama hitting hard. His light handling has done him well - if he gets mired in the mud slinging he will appear less visionar and more like another crap politician doing the same old same old.
It is inspiring to see how the caucuses can undermine the agendas of major 'news' outlets. We still got it, people!

Posted by: Paul Miller on 01/05/08 at 5:48 AM Respond

You don't have to hate Hillary to believe in Obama. All the leading candidates have positive qualities and liabilities. Hillary is intelligent and would probably be very good at governing -- but is she right for the times. I'm becoming more convinced that Obama's inspiration is more what we need at this sad point in our history, but that doesn't make Clinton or Edwards or Richardson bad people.

Posted by: Jeff on 01/05/08 at 7:39 AM Respond

Not only is Obama the candidate for change he's changing other candidates.

It's funny to hear Hillary lift lines from Obama and then criticize him.

Now she says that she's the candidate for the youth and that she wants to reach out to republicans.

Posted by: Mr. Unite Us on 01/05/08 at 7:48 AM Respond

He is articulate, intelligent, possesses a multi-ethnic heritage and his background is that he, a Harvard-trained lawyer with the world as his oyster, has the passion and vision to become a community organizer in the east side of Chicago... Barack Obama is someone the whole world needs in the White House at this time.

We have witnessed for far too long what the attributes of ignorance, fear and greed provide. It's time for hope, vision and upright conduct.

Posted by: Ken from Barbados on 01/05/08 at 8:28 AM Respond

I'm delighted that Obama came out ahead and have every intention to support his campaign throughout. That said, I apparently wasn't hearing his speech the same way many have reported. I actually felt as though he was grazing some pretty familiar liberal populist territory. Pundits seem to suggest that general themes rather than expressing specific issues is savvy for a man who, for what it's worth, has led a life that should give him a unique perspective on America today. Perhaps generalized overtures towards themes of unity would be disrupted if he allowed for his differences to be accentuated. As a result, I think in some regard that Obama missed an opportunity to go deeper and really connect the tropes of change and unity to palpable issues within the states and worldwide (Kenya, for instance) Again, I'm holding out too much judgment here as I have to believe that the elected Obama would bring the bare a character with a lot more clarity and detail than he and his handlers feel is suitable at a moment when he's trying to bring as many people into the fold as possible.

Posted by: absentee ballad on 01/05/08 at 1:38 PM Respond

Reasoning from the comments listed here, by the choices made in Iowa, and exemplified by the assassination of former Pres. Bhutto, misogyny remains a global threat.

Take Blue's comment: Ms. Clinton. Wake-up Blue, she is Senator Clinton and a former First Lady, and an Arkansas former First Lady. Where have you been? Respect is basic, and highest titles are retained. Get it? Even if it is a woman.

Senator Clinton is the most intelligent, best educated, most experienced person running. Some can't handle that.

Worse than Blue, CNN referred to Sen. Clinton as Mrs. Clinton, last week and mentioned the possiblity of the USA having a first First Husband. What? Do we now have a First Wife Laura Bush? Don't they mean First Gentlemen, or better yet, First Lord? That's what the religious right is afraid of, Ha!

Where is everyone? Can we woman still vote? Or will you all and Osama change that too?

Posted by: Jan on 01/05/08 at 1:48 PM Respond

Obama gives a great inspirational speach, but his ideas are abstract and unclear on how he can accomplish the lofty goals of uniting the country. Hillary is the most competent, intelligent, knowledgeable candidate who has specific plans for dealing with the many difficulties facing the next president. To me she is the inspiration with her "can-do" attitude rather than Obama's "pie-in-the-sky" ideas. Besides, she is the one who can face the Republican hate machine - Obama does not have a clue.
We MUST win and Hillary is our best bet!!

Posted by: Milda Walters on 01/05/08 at 6:57 PM Respond

Fine. Go ahead and nominate Obama and see what happens. Newsweek has already anointed him, so scrap the remaining primaries and let him spend the next ten months giving inspirational speeches that make the people feel all warm and comforted and loving towards one another, at the same time as his leadership credentials remain oh-so conveniently off-limits to any kind of serious scrutiny.

Obama is now the only show in town. He's the media darling - the great non-white hope with the common touch. He pushes all the right buttons for bringing shattered dreams to mind. He'll be the new Kennedy, the new King, the new unifier of all the land with his feel-good rhetoric.

So yeah, go ahead and dump all over Clinton and feel wonderfully smug about hitching your star to America's Moses of modern times. Any you might wanna get ready for when the movie lets out and the rest of the world needs dealing with.

Posted by: Bruce on 01/05/08 at 9:25 PM Respond

So yeah, go ahead and dump all over Clinton and feel wonderfully smug about hitching your star to America's Moses of modern times. And you might wanna get ready for when the movie lets out and the rest of the world needs dealing with.

Posted by: Bruce on 01/05/08 at 9:28 PM Respond

Mother Jones, are you guys f'g serious?! This arrogant tool has a fundraisers headlined by a preacher who was delivered from his gay "suffering". You are doting on a guy who says outright he can change his position on abortion but at this type 'trusts women to be prayerful' about the decision? are you serious? you guys cannot be buying INTO THIS!

Posted by: jessi on 01/06/08 at 2:34 AM Respond

Hey blue, you might want to stop reading fox news. the 9 year old reporter liked talking to chelsea and thought the exchange was very nice.

Posted by: jessi on 01/06/08 at 2:35 AM Respond

I don't think Hillary is finding it as hard to dash Obama's hope as she's finding it hard to accept that the Nation really does not want her. I won't even blame it on her being a woman as much as I will blame her for being the woman she is. Her political career has pretty much consisted of being a corporate lawyer by trade, being 1st lady, warming a seat in the US Senate while covetously eying the big desk in the Nicest Office on the Hill, and coyly, yet oh so ambitiously kissing K Street butts to appease the Corporatocracy stealthily against the best interests of Bush43 abused voters. Of the resumes submitted in application for the Top Job, Hillary's was the weakest, padded well and most obviously with Bill's experience. I think Iowa was Hillary's wake up call to alert her that the gig was up. Only the Geritol set and the Oilers of Olay bought into her action in one of the whitest places in the USA. Everyone else saw her appeal for unity through her experience as another Clinton potentially giving another Bush a pass the way Bill did Poppy. Had Bill investigated the GOP and the BFEE for Iran-Contra and the Bush41 Gulf Wars, the Bush41 legacy would not have birthed the bastardy of the Bush43 Administration. America is sick of this and wants something utterly different, not GOP Lite.

Posted by: rage on 01/06/08 at 5:50 AM Respond

Obama is up bt 12 points in N.H. He will win again.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/06/08 at 8:19 AM Respond

A new poll has Obama up 14%. the Rasmussen poll has Obama up 10%.
Hillary will lose N.H. and then South Carolina. By Super Tuesday she will be done.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/06/08 at 6:40 PM Respond

Ummmm...what poll are you reading Ames? As of Sunday, they are tied in NH.

Also, Obama has great rhetoric, but no real idea of how to accomplish anything. He definitely does not have my vote.

Posted by: Shawn on 01/06/08 at 6:54 PM Respond

A new poll has Obama up 14%. the Rasmussen poll has Obama up 10%.
Hillary will lose N.H. and then South Carolina. By Super Tuesday she will be done.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/06/08 at 7:37 PM Respond

u hit the nail almost squarrely on the head, however do not underestimate john Edwards' ability to have a good showing in NH. his message rivals that of barak, and I beleive in the end that he has less of a handicap then Obama. Do not forget the 2004 elections. There is a score to settle, and the time is right for Edwards to pick up the mantle of the center, maybe even have obama as a VP. What do you think?

Posted by: haj M. on 01/07/08 at 4:02 AM Respond

Joe good points. But I think it is the beginning of the end for Hillary. She cannot seem to get any independent's voting for her. She has lost the female vote as well. Did you see the numbers from Iowa? It is the independents that ruled. She will lose New Hampshire. Ger delegates wil start to drop like flies all over the country. Obama is far for electable than Hillary.

Posted by: Ames Tiedeman on 01/07/08 at 6:24 AM Respond

Hey Lib's

She is such a Tramp..:-) You have NO idea how GOOD it feels for us to watch her and her C*M stained hubby to go down in flames..:-) Now maybe the two of them can crawl back into there holes in little rock, and watch REAL men do Political battle....

HAHAHAHAHAH

BIll... Semper Fi

Posted by: Bill Nigh on 01/07/08 at 7:24 PM Respond