Politics Re: Hillary’s “Conversation”
posted by on January 22 at 17:10 PM
As predicted, Hillary’s first webchat didn’t produce any astonishing new positions from the Senator or any uncomfortable questions from out of the wild web yonder.
What it did produce is a ton of email addresses for the Hillary Clinton campaign (you had to give an email address in order to watch the chat), more grist for the continuing mainstream media coverage of Hillary’s newly-launched presidential bid, a bunch of well-screened questions from the public, and a study in Clinton’s on-camera demeanor.
Clinton was, as even her detractors have taken to noting, extremely competent. She was obviously in command of all the issues that came up (health care, terrorism, energy independence, etc.) and in her instinct toward intelligent inquiry and perpetual dialogue she provided a stark contrast to the man she wants to replace. But I don’t know if she passed the likability test, the test of whether the average American wants to watch her on television (or on some computer’s media player) for four years starting in 2008.
Perhaps it’s unfair, but the inevitable comparison one ends up reaching for, when watching Hillary speak, is with her husband. And she is not as smooth or emotive as Bill Clinton, nor is she as warm. The question is whether, after eight years of Bush, Americans will settle for cold and competent. Andrew Sullivan frames it this way:
Hillary is essentially saying that we should trust her. She is giving us a clear signal of what a second Clinton administration would be like: all the centrism and responsibility of her husband’s eight years but without any of the charm.Is that what Americans want? It seems that what they want is a form of escapism (in the form of Edwards), charisma (in the shape of Barack Obama), or integrity (in the guise of John McCain). But when the decision nears and the stakes, especially abroad, begin to seep in, might Hillary be right? Might they actually be yearning for dullness, competence and responsibility?
I'd give my left nut for some dull competence right about now. Did she say anything about constitutionality, checks and balances, or signing statements?
Dear G-d in heaven, please grant me not just eight years of dull competence and responsibility, but eighty years of it. I dearly want our national politics to be as dull as those of Germany or Sweden.
It's true. I watch the CBC all the time and it's so weird seeing a government (Canadian) that's run by sane people. Their news is so soothing, and I think most people would be happy with that after 8 years of this psycho, right wing joy ride that may end with Bush totaling us.
McCain = integrity? I might have agreed with this a few years ago, but...really? McCain?
Fuck Hillary Clinton AND fuck Andrew Sullivan.
If she does the job right then I just don't care about how "warm" she is. I'm looking for deeds, not charisma. She can be friendly when she needs to be.
Dear Fnarf:
I'm missing a "left nut." Gone. A nice lady in a hospital in MN took it away for some fairly sound medical reasons.
I hear that expression fairly often and it typically goes something like this: "I'd give my left nut for that job." My response is "No you wouldn't." But in this case sure maybe. But I know I wouldn't give my right one to see Hil in office.
Knock on wood.
Clinton/Obama 2008, pleasepleaseplease!
The cynical part of me assumes (a) that pairing will never occur, and (b) neither of them will obtain the P or VP slots at all. Prolly another dull white dude.
But you never know.
At least Hilary has experience being the president, that should give her an edge. And she knows what she's getting herself into.
I'm sorry, m.Hertzmann, for blithely using your medical misfortune as a tired old metaphor. And for the misfortune itself, of course.
I'm not sure I'd be interested in parting with any body parts for the sake of Clinton II, either, but if it comes down to a choice between her and any Republican, I'll take it or any other part you care to nominate off my own self if it seems likely to help. What I really mean is: ANYTHING, ANYTHING.
You're right, though; it's always "my left", never the right.
Yeah, Mrs. "Troop Cap" Clinton ain't cutting it. At least start to articulate a coherent Iraq policy cause you know that's the issue you're gunna get ripped on all through the primaries. If you're "in to win" or whatever you better start talking Iraq, and quick. Doesn't have to be immediate withdrawal, but it's gotta be something better than a troop cap, a triangulation even for an incurable triangulator like HRC.
If I wanted to vote for a royal dynasty like Bush or Clinton, I'd have stayed in Canada. Give us fresh blood!
The good thing about a Clinton/Obama administration (or vice-versa, for that matter) would be the huge surge in deaths for racists and conservatives (from all of their heads exploding). Once they were out of the picture, we might actually make some progress in this country.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).