Now, it's Bill who's stumbled

Now, wait just a minute. Did you see what Hillary Clinton's husband suggested late Monday? That criticism of her in the last week by those Democrats competing with her for the party's nomination was comparable to the Swift boat smear campaign against the party's nominee, John Kerry, in 2004.

Give us a break! 

As the transcript shows, a week ago tonight H. Clinton was doing just fine in the Philadelphia MSNBC debate up until the last half-hour or so. Then in two areas -- driver's licenses for illegal aliens and finally opening up her first lady archives to public scrutiny as she had promised long ago -- she started to bob and weave and dodge. In an interview with Candy Crowley on Tuesday, Clinton admitted, "I wasn't at my best the other night."

And her opponents -- especially Chris Dodd, John Edwards and Barack Obama, who all trail badly in national polls -- pounced during and after the debate because her reaction played right into a preexisting image of her as a calculating parser of words who'll always try to have it both ways with careful answers that won't come back to bite her in the backside during the general election campaign.

And, gee, why would anyone doubt the word of a Clinton?

Because she had done so consistently well by being careful in previous debates, Clinton's sudden ...

fudging stood out. They weren't anything near fatal mistakes. They were nicks. But now it's the Clintons' own revealing reactions that have turned the minor stumbles into a big deal with real political legs. And caused many to wonder about deeper things, to her challengers' advantage. Even the Republicans have chimed in.

The day after the debate Clinton's campaign manager, Patti Doyle, dispatched an e-mail appeal to supporters for funds, playing the gender card by suggesting the guys at the debate were "piling on," six against one. Doesn't that just take you back to the playground in fifth grade?

Then Clinton spoke to the gals at her alma mater and said the all-girls school had prepared her to compete in the all-boys club of presidential politics. And when she caught flak for playing the poor female victim, Clinton admitted, quite accurately, that the boys had gone after her because she was something called the front-runner.

There's no way Obama or Edwards is going to become 30 points more popular. For them to catch Clinton, she's got to become less popular, too. It's called politics. And that's what competing campaigns are supposed to do -- test all the candidates and reveal their cracks, whether one candidate thinks she's won it already or not.

Some new post-debate polling data indicates that's exactly what has at least started to happen in recent days -- Clinton's still leading substantially, but her support is slipping noticeably since the debate.

Now you'll see some real piling on, especially since Bill Clinton has uttered this latest Swift boat overreaction. (Interestingly, a video of those remarks was deleted from YouTube on Tuesday with the terse notation: "This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.")

"I was pretty stunned by that statement" by the former president, Obama said today. Dodd was even more vehement. "To have the former president come out and suggest this is a form of Swift-boating ... is way over the top in my view," Dodd said.

"If elected to the presidency," the Connecticut senator added, "there will be a lot of tough questions, and if you can't handle it in a debate without accusing everybody who has an issue with you of piling on or a sexist attack somehow, first of all that's unwise, and secondly it's false."

Time will tell. The standard political pattern for Clintons when they make a public mistake is to back up and come back out even smoother and stronger and smarter, as if nothing had happened. It's always worked before.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Spiffy]

"The standard political pattern for Clintons when they make a public mistake is to back up and come back out even smoother and stronger and smarter, as if nothing had happened. It's always worked before."

I completely agree!

HxH = Hispanos por Hillary!

[Jan]

As a proud Clinton supporter (who never voted for Bill Clinton) I find these types of comments hysterical:
"Some new post-debate polling data indicates that's exactly what has at least started to happen in recent days -- Clinton's still leading substantially, but her support is slipping noticeably since the debate."

First, we hear that the polls don't matter because it's still [insert amount of time of your choice here) before the election.
Now, regarding polls again, suddenly Clinton is "slippingly noticably."
Uh, except in the same sentence, she's "still leading SUBSTANTIALLY."

Whew. So... now it's yet another Clinton who has "stumbled"?
Wanna bet?
I bet John Edwards' poll numbers will "slip noticably" over his new campaign strategy..

[vwcat]

As a female democrat I say Thank you! you hit it square on the head.
It is not the debate that hurt Hillary. It is the actions the past week. I find playing the gender card to be a cheap ploy that makes me feel insulted rather than anything else.
Then when it did not work she sends out surrogates who only served to make it worse for her. Hillary not only insulted independent and capable women everywhere but, opened herself up to some deep weaknesses.
what she exposed is that she is more about game playing and winning rather than governing. If she reacts this way over legitimate questioning concerning her flip flopping and evasiveness and secretiveness, one night out of a year of kid glove treatment, then how can she expect to be taken seriously as leader of the free world and how is she going to act in real tough situations. She proves herself weak and petulant rather than strong.
and this gives the gop further ammunition, possibly fatal if she is the nominee, by behaving like a spoiled child.
I find Hillary has again shown she possess very bad judgment and lacks any ability to show grace under fire.
I do hope that finally the voters in my party will clear the koolaid haze out of their eyes and clear their heads. See Hillary for the weak and self obsessed and problematic candidate she really is and look to our other candidates who I have always felt were far superior and stronger than Hillary.

[Robin, VT]

Can you say it's Bill who stumbled or don't you need to say Hillary's and her campaign stumbled. If Hillary and Bill cannot communicate about what Bill is going to say or not going to say, then Hillary has a big problem...Bill. If Hillary is going to make a statement when interviewed by Candy on how she understands that this is not a gender race, then who is fooling who? Did not (also stated about in article) that her people, Hillary herself and the ads all imply or state that she is in a man's race? She leaves me questioning if she can be trusted in what she says or not says. And I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Bruce P]

The Clintons' paranoia is not going to win them any votes. It was because they were so good at alienating everyone who didn't agree with them 100 percent that they failed to pass health care reform the first time. They aren't entiteld to another chance to make the same mistakes all over again.

[John, Des Moines]

Hillary is slipping not only because of a debate and the Bill factor but because people are realizing she is not the best candidate to head the Democratic ticket in 2008.

Democrats want to win more than anything. To win they need a candidate strong on foreign policy and conscientious towards the faith community.

They are beginning to see what I have seen (as a Republican) all along, Joe Biden is their best choice.

I will be caucusing for a Democrat for the first time in my 64 years next January.

Joe Biden: Courage, Conviction, Leadership in 2008.

[dras]

Has anyone ever stopped and wondered just where our country and the greater part of the freeworld would be if Bill Clinton had been allowed to serve until someone beat him in an election.
Just the economy alone would be fascinating.
With out the current Administration's policy's of throwing money that we don't have down a dried up oil hole we would have had enough years of a growing treasury that Health Care and Education and Social Security problems would have been solved.
Boy did we ever make a huge mistake in electing a half a** cowboy from Texas. We even had his dad as an example, what was it, didn't we believe that a son could be as stupid as a dad was. Didn't the Iran Contra thing tell us anything.
Even as we look at the Bush Families Holdings we can't see how they are profiting from G.W. Bush Administration's Policies.
Even as we read new book just about every week written by former Bush People and we don't believe them.
When the top people of the CIA and National Security were forced out because they were advising what Bush and Company didn't want to hear we should have acted. When a CIA agent, tops in her field in WMD was outed, we didn't listen. Boy are we a bunch of bullheaded jerks. No wonder the world hates us.

[soon to be ex demopublican]

Hillary Clinton's campaign is a joke. Sure she's a "woman" and she's running for president, but her entire candidacy is predicated on being married to a powerful man who held the job previously, getting elected to the Senate because she was married to him, and now uses him to promote her candidacy.

She can't be honest with voters about the war (She's pro-war, and pro occupation and talks like she isn't) she can't really tell us what she really thinks on tough issues (she hasn't done 100000 focus groups) and she can't help play the gender card when things get tough in a debate. Wonder how that will play when she's at the g8 Summit with "the men?" ("Oh poor little me those europeans are mean men") Please.

Democrats are going to nominate a candidate with a lot of flaws and will most likely lose as a result. They have a sitting president at levels so unpopular he's less popular than Nixon before he resigned...and yet they're gonna support Hillary because she's Bill's Wife, and she's a Girl. Way to go, Dumbocrats, you're gonna ensure we have four more years of GOP mismanagement. Thanks for noththing.

[cali_sun]

John, Des Moines "I will caucus for a Democrat for the 1st time in 64 yrs.!"
It's really tiring to read such lies, you never were are conservative, espcially after claiming to vote for Biden, a plagiarist.

The Clinton is summirzed best by Hollywoods David Geffen, who said this: "All politicians lie, but the Clinton's do it with such ease, it's troubling!' He used to be a big supporter, giving millions to them.

[madison]

People who are proud hillary supporters will find any reason to like her, its border line fanatical behavior, so i doubt she will slip much.

[martin]

Cali_sun wins.
David Geffen saw a Clinton candidacy as bad for the Democratic party and bad for the country. Hillary is simply a bad leader, regardless of how much more popular she is over the other Democrats in current polling.

[annh]

I've been waiting for CLINTON FATIGUE to set in so that people remember what a psychodrama having them as President and Co-president last time was really like. This country can ill afford a dynasty of this caliber at such an important juncture in our history.

[BlueColllar]

I'm a union member whose voted straight Democratic since 1968.
But if Hillary is the nominee I'll hold my nose and vote for a republican for president. She and her brown shirt friends are ruthless and dangerous for America.

[dbh]

Yes, all Presidents have had bad apples/problems (including both Bush's)...but we Repubs can't wait to recite the Hillary resume (if you want to call it that)::
- FBI files, Whitewater, health care debacle, Travel gate, JanetReno/Waco
- (no business, or financial governance of any kind or success)

Plus the negative numbers are pretty shocking:

CRIME STATS
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with Clintons who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

SMALTZ INVESTIGATION
- Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15
- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6
- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million
- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million

CAMPAIGN FINANCE INVESTIGATION
- As of June 2000, the Justice Department listed 25 people indicted and 19 convicted because of the 1996 Clinton-Gore fundraising scandals.
- According to the House Committee on Government Reform in September 2000, 79 House and Senate witnesses asserted the Fifth Amendment in the course of investigations into Gore's last fundraising campaign.
-James Riady entered a plea agreement to pay an $8.5 million fine for campaign finance crimes. This was a record under campaign finance laws.

CRIMES FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS WERE OBTAINED
Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice

[Vinny]

The comments section is reaching the point of idiocy. It is abused when people bring out nonsensical arguments, random tangents and prefabricated slurs against candidates that are simply copied and pasted. Commenters put on the martyr clothing and play their persecution complex to the fullest tilt when there is the slightest real or (more often than not) perceived slight against their preferred candidate. This blog is slowly becoming just like the other popular political blogs: visited by partisans and used by them to spread their own message.