We didn’t watch the Democrat primary debates a couple nights ago (B-Daddy did and provided this thoughts here) but in reading the post-game reports the dominant angle is that Hillary was on the defensive from the “attacks” of her fellow Democrat challengers.
Clinton Inc. has responded to this in two seemingly incongruous ways. On one hand they are playing the victim card in hoping to appeal to the women voters that poor lil’ ol’ Hillary was being beat-up by a pack of (nearly) all-white, (nearly) all-male bullies. On the other, they were playing Hil’ as a tough old broad who could hold her own in the brass-knuckle world of politics. (Read about both here and here).
But its not as much cake-having and eating as it would seem. Clinton’s gender and oddly enough, her low “like-a-bility” quotient makes it possible to play the victim and the tuff-chick card at the same time.
We were a little perplexed, though, at Clinton Inc.’s surprise at these debate broadsides. It should have come as no shock that Hillary would be the one with the target on her back at these debates. Afterall, don’t all incumbents have one?
Clinton Inc. has responded to this in two seemingly incongruous ways. On one hand they are playing the victim card in hoping to appeal to the women voters that poor lil’ ol’ Hillary was being beat-up by a pack of (nearly) all-white, (nearly) all-male bullies. On the other, they were playing Hil’ as a tough old broad who could hold her own in the brass-knuckle world of politics. (Read about both here and here).
But its not as much cake-having and eating as it would seem. Clinton’s gender and oddly enough, her low “like-a-bility” quotient makes it possible to play the victim and the tuff-chick card at the same time.
We were a little perplexed, though, at Clinton Inc.’s surprise at these debate broadsides. It should have come as no shock that Hillary would be the one with the target on her back at these debates. Afterall, don’t all incumbents have one?
Posts
3 comments:
Dean,
I think her staff knew this was coming and the surprise is feigned. Both the poor little Hillary image and the "tough broad" image were pre-positioned responses (a concept I know you're familar with.) Hillary's team has been working to overcome the sense that she's not really a woman for quite some time. Everything, her clothes, hair styling, the way she gets off topic on certain questions, (see her response on science education) is intended to showcase her "concern" for women and how she is one of them. I think her democrat opponents lobbed her a big fat softball that her staff is going to hit out of the park. However, I think this strategy might backfire. I would expect al-Qaeda to pull something in an attempt to influence the 2008 elections, see the Madrid train bombings. Then her "poor victim" schtick isn't going to sit well with a public looking for a Commander-In-Chief.
It's just starting. Dig this.
Clinton's strategy is the political equivalent of a football team being up 2 scores and deciding to go into the dreaded "prevent defense".
This "playing not to lose" business has let her opponents right back in the ball game, it would appear.
Enough sports analogies, for now.
Post a Comment