« Giuliani's controversial praise for Lincoln (!) | Main | Joe Lieberman's long lost twin »

March 06, 2007


I share your irritation with this sort of sophomoric psychobabble, but...there is a reason why she gets this kind of coverage.

Clinton is an ok Senator and would probably be an ok President. I would certainly vote for her before I'd vote for any Republicann. However, the idea that she is a brilliant politician is a myth. She is a hamhanded politician with a tin ear.

All politicians position themselves and frame issues to some extent.. HRC's problem is that she is so clumsy and obvious about it that her positioning and framing becomes the issue. This is why her "dislikes" are so high on polls. She does not come off as authentic.

That is a real handicap in a national race. In order to win Democrats need their base plus a big chunk of the independent vote. Independents care about issues but they "vote for the person, not the party" and very often will vote for a person who does not share their issues at all. Independents vote for the politician that seems the more trusthworthy and authentic to them: perveived rustworthiness trumps issues. HRC, with her carefully scripted talking points and carefully framed positions goes over like a lead balloon.
HRC and her consultants and advisers think that she can get independent votes by positioning herself toward the middle, a tactic which is self-defeating since the very fact that she is so obviously positioning herself is a turn off to independents.

I am not saying that she isn't trustworthy and, if she gets the nomination, I will vote for her. However, she will continnue get coverage that emphasizes her efforts to seem to be this or that because because her campaign is, in fact, about seeming to be this or that. That how the Beltway consultant class thinks Democrats should campaign. It is a measure of her political obtuseness that she hasn't figured out what a mistake it is.

The comments to this entry are closed.