8/18/2008
The Atlantic Monthly’s Joshua Green published a phenomenal analysis of Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign. Pointing out that “Hillary Clinton’s campaign was undone by a clash of personalities more toxic than anyone imagined,” Green goes on to outline in the most minute detail I’ve yet seen exactly what happened to Senator Clinton’s campaign.
I think what is especially powerful about this article is that Green’s analysis is backed up by a series of memos and emails that he was given access to by campaign staffers. I have to think there were many hard feelings held by former Clinton staffers for them to turn over this kind of information.
There is a such a wealth of documentation, Green could easily write a book on all of this. For any who, like myself, love this stuff, you can find electronic copies of everything Green was given here.
What I find interesting, however, is that despite being ultimately defeated in the primaries, Senator Clinton continues to show her influence, both with her party and in particular with Senator Obama, who is allowing Senator Clinton a roll call vote at the upcoming Democratic convention. I’m not an expert here, but if Senator Clinton garners a significant level of support, won’t voters see that as a sign of weakness?
Finally, I find Green’s analysis of the Clinton campaign strategy to be fascinating in that I believe the Senator’s plan made sense. One of the first and primary constituencies Senator Clinton looked to for support was women. And, personally, having spoken to a family member (who shall remain nameless) who is a woman and is in her late 60’s/early 70’s, it became clear to me how sound a strategy this was.
This female family member of mine confided that she has been looking to Senator Clinton as one who would, once and for all, show that women could do whatever men could do. She had voted for Senator Clinton twice during the Senator’s congressional campaigs and voted for her again in the Democratic primary. She was saddened by Senator Clinton’s loss to Obama, and while I do not know for sure, I don’t believe she will vote for Senator Obama in the general election.
One last little thought. It looks to me, and to Joshua Green as well, that Senator Clinton’s greatest weakness was not her opponent’s strength or her own lack of ability, but the egos that seemed to predominate within the senior levels of her campaign organization. Conservatives often paint Senator Clinton as arrogant, but if she is, it pales in comparison with some of the ego-driven personalities working for her campaign.
While Senator Clinton had some extremely talented people working for her, the lack of a definitive head, and the Senator’s seeming inability to clamp down on her senior advisers when necessary, went a long way towards sinking her campaign. People love to criticize President Bush for appointing strong leaders like Karl Rove to lead his campaign efforts, but now the wisdom of this strategy becomes apparent. You must have a strong leader who can harness the talents of senior advisors, focus their efforts, and set a clear direction when appropriate.
1 Comment
[…] a recent post, one where I reviewed an excellent article by the Atlantic Monthly, which posted some interesting […]
Pingback by Viewpoint Journal » Why Not Clinton? — 8/25/2008 @ 7:19 am