Noonan on Clinton Downturn

email this story
read comments (45)
post a comment

"Mrs. Clinton is losing this thing," says Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan in a 2.8 piece called "Can Mrs. Clinton Lose?" "It's not one big primary, it's a rolling loss, a daily one, an inch-by-inch deflation. The trends and indices are not in her favor.

"She is having trouble raising big money, she's funding her campaign with her own wealth, her moral standing within her own party and among her own followers has been dragged down, and the legacy of Clintonism tarnished by what Bill Clinton did in South Carolina. Unfavorable primaries lie ahead. She doesn't have the excitement, the great whoosh of feeling that accompanies a winning campaign. The guy from Chicago who was unknown a year ago continues to gain purchase, to move forward. For a soft little innocent, he's played a tough and knowing inside/outside game.

"The day she admitted she'd written herself a check for $5 million, Obama's people crowed they'd just raised $3 million. But then his staff is happy. They're all getting paid.

"Political professionals are leery of saying, publicly, that she is losing, because they said it before New Hampshire and turned out to be wrong. Some of them signaled their personal weariness with Clintonism at that time, and fear now, as they report, to look as if they are carrying an agenda. One part of the Clinton mystique maintains: Deep down journalists think she's a political Rasputin who will not be dispatched. Prince Yusupov served him cupcakes laced with cyanide, emptied a revolver, clubbed him, tied him up and threw him in a frozen river. When he floated to the surface they found he'd tried to claw his way from under the ice. That is how reporters see Hillary.

"And that is a grim and over-the-top analogy, which I must withdraw. What I really mean is they see her as the Glenn Close character in Fatal Attraction: "I won't be ignored, Dan!"

"Mr. Obama's achievement on Super Tuesday was solid and reinforced trend lines. The popular vote was a draw, the delegate count a rough draw, but he won 13 states, and when you look at the map he captured the middle of the country from Illinois straight across to Idaho, with a second band, in the northern Midwest, of Minnesota and North Dakota. He won Missouri and Connecticut, in Mrs. Clinton's backyard. He won the Democrats of the red states.

"On the wires Wednesday her staff was all but conceding she is not going to win the next primaries. Her superdelegates are coming under pressure that is about to become unrelenting. It was easy for party hacks to cleave to Mrs. Clinton when she was inevitable. Now Mr. Obama's people are reportedly calling them saying, 'Your state voted for me and so did your congressional district. Are you going to jeopardize your career and buck the wishes of the people back home?'

"Mrs. Clinton is stoking the idea that Mr. Obama is too soft to withstand the dread Republican attack machine. (I nod in tribute to all Democrats who have succeeded in removing the phrase 'Republican and Democratic attack machines' from the political lexicon. Both parties have them.) But Mr. Obama will not be easy for Republicans to attack. He will be hard to get at, hard to address. There are many reasons, but a primary one is that the fact of his race will freeze them. No one, no candidate, no party, no heavy-breathing consultant, will want to cross any line -- lines that have never been drawn, that are sure to be shifting and not always visible -- in approaching the first major-party African-American nominee for president of the United States.

"He is the brilliant young black man as American dream. No consultant, no matter how opportunistic and hungry, will think it easy -- or professionally desirable -- to take him down in a low manner. If anything, they've learned from the Clintons in South Carolina what that gets you. (I add that yes, there are always freelance mental cases, who exist on both sides and are empowered by modern technology. They'll make their YouTubes. But the mad are ever with us, and this year their work will likely stay subterranean.)

"With Mr. Obama the campaign will be about issues. 'He'll raise your taxes.' He will, and I suspect Americans may vote for him anyway. But the race won't go low.

"Mrs. Clinton would be easier for Republicans. With her cavalcade of scandals, they'd be delighted to go at her. They'd get medals for it. Consultants would get rich on it.

"The Democrats have it exactly wrong. Hillary is the easier candidate, Mr. Obama the tougher. Hillary brings negative; it's fair to hit her back with negative. Mr. Obama brings hope, and speaks of a better way. He's not Bambi, he's bulletproof.

"The biggest problem for the Republicans will be that no matter what they say that is not issue oriented -- 'He's too young, he's never run anything, he's not fully baked' -- the mainstream media will tag them as dealing in racial overtones, or undertones. You can bet on this. Go to the bank on it.

"The Democrats continue not to recognize what they have in this guy. Believe me, Republican professionals know. They can tell."

What'd I do?<< previous | next >>Another Sluggish Weekend

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on February 8, 2008 at 7:13 PM

comment #1

D.Z. says ...

I still don't get how someone who wins California and NY-albeit by disenfranchising non-partisan voters-is short on dough. Is her base really that cheap? Anyway, I don't think race would be an issue as much as the fact that Obama comes off way too likable in general for any criticism to stick. Any Republican attacking him would come off like an old fart in comparison.

Posted by D.Z. at February 8, 2008 7:36 PM

comment #2

BurmaShave says ...

These people are actually scared of him. You can tell if you read enough of them. Cue mutiny coming on to tell us this is part of the GOP trap in five, four, three.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 7:41 PM

comment #3

Joe Leydon says ...

Tell us more, DZ. (Thought you might like to hear that as a change of pace.)

Posted by Joe Leydon at February 8, 2008 8:06 PM

comment #4

Geoff says ...

That was a fucking great read. Love the FATAL ATTRACTION quote. I wont be able to get that out of my head now.

Posted by Geoff at February 8, 2008 8:12 PM

comment #5

christian says ...

The WSJ -- fount of GOP wisdom.

Posted by christian at February 8, 2008 8:24 PM

comment #6

mutinyco says ...

If they're so scared of him, then why has McCain already publicly declared that he can beat Obama? As it is now, he's busy throwing jabs at Hillary.

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 8:38 PM

comment #7

le corbeau says ...

Wow, a presidential candidate said he could beat the other side? Get out!

Posted by le corbeau at February 8, 2008 8:42 PM

comment #8

mutinyco says ...

No, it's the difference in how he's dealing with the 2 Democrats. He's confident against Obama. He's trading fire with Hillary because he's more afraid of her -- and believes she'll be the nominee.

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 8:46 PM

comment #9

mutinyco says ...

What's going on in the media is mildly deceptive.

For instance, a headline at the Washington Post proclaims: "Obama Gets Gregoire Nod." However, the smaller text below that, if you continue reading, tells you that Clinton was endorsed by Washington's 2 senators Cantwell and Murray. Well, that's 2 major state endorsements to 1, yet it's the headline that makes the impression.

As well, Yahoo! has a headline: "Obama leads Clinton By Only 2 Delegates." Without context, you'd think that meant the entire vote count. But no, it's just referring to the most current Super Tuesday count, and if you actually read the article, you'll find out that overall Clinton leads Obama by 1055 to 998.

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 9:05 PM

comment #10

plaidranger says ...

I work with many Republicans on issues as a lobbyist. Yes Obama is inexperienced, and in fact has very liberal record. However, Noonan has it right, he will be much harder to beat.

Hillary is a known story, and won't get the kind of favorable press Obama will as the first black nominee. If it was any other woman, the press would be equally fawning on Hillary But her story is old -- i.e. everyone knows her.

Women other than Hillary are also much harder to attack. With a few exceptions, it looks like the male is attacking. Hillary is so hard edged that you do not have the same problems.

So Obama will have history, and he is very intelligent and well-disciplined speaker (So is Hillary). If he beats the Clinton attack machine, I am not sure how much more the Republicans can attack him. Don't forget Hillary is an instant fundraising machine for the Republicans.

Finally Hillary has the war issue. The hard core left (i.e. Cindy Sheehan) is loony enough not to vote for Hillary.

Many of my campaign friends question whether Obama is beatable if he wins the nomination. The early end to the Republican primary is the best hope.

Posted by plaidranger at February 8, 2008 9:21 PM

comment #11

BurmaShave says ...

Mr. Stuart you never cease to dissapoint.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 9:21 PM

comment #12

BurmaShave says ...

that was supposed to be a pithy "amaze", but I guess the truth will out.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 9:22 PM

comment #13

mutinyco says ...

You may disagree with me. That's fine. But, if nothing else, my comments are pretty levelheaded. I'm not making wild accusations or getting emotional. Just telling it as I see it.

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 9:25 PM

comment #14

Mike Schaefer says ...

Excuse me, but ... Peggy Noonan? Never mind that she's a GOP apologist, she's an idiot. Anyone else see her on The Daily Show this week? She was asked why Giuliani's campaign folded and she expressed bafflement -- "here's a guy who's never committed a gaffe and never had a scandal.." WTF? Where's she been the past couple of months? And she still pronounces Obama's first name "barrack" (like where they make you live when you're in the Army) instead of "Bah-ROCK". Sheesh.

Posted by Mike Schaefer at February 8, 2008 9:27 PM

comment #15

BurmaShave says ...

mutinyco, Senatorial endorsements don't mean much, as Massachussets showed, since they have no machine in the state. Furthermore these are both female Senators, sorry, but that does influence it. And why would old news be in a new headline? Gregoire just announced her endorsement becauase the caucus is this weekend. Seriously, stick to movies. You're out of your element Donny.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 9:27 PM

comment #16

BurmaShave says ...

Shaefer I dont mind the Barrack Obama pronunciation, it's beautifully obstinate, like people who still insist on pronouncing Qatar
'Cutter'.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 9:30 PM

comment #17

mutinyco says ...

But...Gregoire is a woman too, no? If that's the issue, then why didn't she endorse Hillary?

Burma, what you just did in your post is the exact opposite of what I've been doing -- and it's the point I was making in my previous post. I'm not insulting anybody or getting emotional about it.

The point is, people keep trying to argue Hillary's finished -- yet there's no evidence to back this up.

Perhaps she will lose. I don't know that. But it's pretty difficult to argue that the current delegate leader is finished. And it also seems obvious to me that there is a media bias in favor of Obama, as evidenced by the two examples I gave above.

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 9:37 PM

comment #18

BurmaShave says ...

I am the walrus? I am the walrus.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 8, 2008 9:39 PM

comment #19

mutinyco says ...

Goo goo ga joob...

Posted by mutinyco at February 8, 2008 9:41 PM

comment #20

musealien says ...

Would it be possible to set up a second site or just a link to another page for the constant politics / Hilary-bashing / Obama-praising? Wahsington-Elsewhere perhaps? I really enjoy all the movie stuff on this site and read it regularly but am getting so tired of having to trawl through your one-note political opinions. You don't like Hilary, we get it. You like Obama, we get that too. Great. But please... enough. It's becoming so tiresome.

Posted by musealien at February 8, 2008 11:16 PM

comment #21

Mr. Muckle says ...

I find it amazing that this Republic may (good luck) actually survive (barely) possibly the most destructive asshole ever to hold elective office in American life (GW) who, if it were up to me would spend the rest of his life in prison, but not in a clean country, disgraced and never heard from again as a thoroughly despicable humanoid and criminal, and yet with our minute span of attention and apparently inexhaustible wealth of hatred we have such oodles of animosity to spare that we can now expend it upon some incomparably better candidates willing to take a stab at cleaning up a particle of the mess he's made. What a deluded people we are, so starry-eyed we've forgotten the mugging before the muggers have even left the scene.

Posted by Mr. Muckle at February 9, 2008 12:10 AM

comment #22

le corbeau says ...

Maybe that's because not everyone agrees with your extreme position, Mr. Muckle, and thus actually puts some thought into who the next one should be so they'll continue some of the policies that have prevented the next US terror attack after 9/11, begun to turn the tide of middle east sentiment against al-Qaeda and aganst the generation of Arab strongmen who made it such a failure in the post-WWII era, etc.

Frothing may now commence at the very idea that anything about Bush's term has been successful.

Posted by le corbeau at February 9, 2008 6:57 AM

comment #23

Chuck Latovich says ...

Peggy Noonan. Now there's a neutral voice for you.

Posted by Chuck Latovich at February 9, 2008 7:04 AM

comment #24

le corbeau says ...

That was a day late and a dollar short.

Global cooling news:

http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

It appears that changes in the sun have much more to do with earth temperatures while:

"R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales.""

Posted by le corbeau at February 9, 2008 7:08 AM

comment #25

christian says ...

I agree with most of mr. muckle's sane position.

Posted by christian at February 9, 2008 10:16 AM

comment #26

truefaith says ...

BurmaShave: Why is everyone "out of their element" when you don't agree with them?

Jeff Wells: Getting tired of these anti-Hillary articles. We get it. You like Obama. Do strong women threaten your masculinity in some way?

Posted by truefaith at February 9, 2008 10:24 AM

comment #27

Arizona Joe says ...

Peggy Noonan is a biased shitass of a Junior Leaguer type. Her hoity toity moralist tone is enough to make you vomit. As a Catholic, she should be ashamed to have been an enabler of George W. Bush.

I am torn on Hillary Clinton. You read some pundits like Frank Rich, who say the Clintons are politically unscrupulous and effete and should go. And then some real smart people like Paul Krugman who think Hillary Clinton has the better thought out plans, especially concerning healthcare.

So, it is a difficult call. And I think a lot of Democrats are in a quandary.

Although Wells is an Obama guy, he should be congratulated for a Clintonesque triangulating of his webpage between Hollywood and politics, all the while attracting more eyeballs and income from banner ads.

There are so many lousy movies out, why not talk about politics?

Posted by Arizona Joe at February 9, 2008 10:51 AM

comment #28

D.Z. says ...

Apparently, http://www.electoral-vote.com/ linked an article from David Brooks which does agree with Jeff that non-college educated women fit Hillary's base.

Mgmax: "begun to turn the tide of middle east sentiment against al-Qaeda and aganst the generation of Arab strongmen who made it such a failure in the post-WWII era, etc"

We're the ones who hired those strongmen...

I wonder how much they paid him to say that.

truefaith: If she was strong, she wouldn't be using her husband's name to get ahead...

Posted by D.Z. at February 9, 2008 11:00 AM

comment #29

dangovich says ...

Well stated, Mr. Muckle.

Posted by dangovich at February 9, 2008 11:12 AM

comment #30

nemo says ...

"... a political Rasputin who will not be dispatched. Prince Yusupov served him cupcakes laced with cyanide, emptied a revolver, clubbed him, tied him up and threw him in a frozen river. When he floated to the surface they found he'd tried to claw his way from under the ice."

Noonan left out that Yusupov also stabbed Rasputin before throwing him under the ice.

Posted by nemo at February 9, 2008 11:46 AM

comment #31

BurmaShave says ...

truefaith, how dare you ask me that. You're out of your element.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 9, 2008 1:07 PM

comment #32

BurmaShave says ...

Also DZ I love how when you link something you always say 'Apparently' because you concede you are insane and you may very well be hallucinatiing.

Posted by BurmaShave at February 9, 2008 1:15 PM

comment #33

D.Z. says ...

Burma: No, I'm just acknowledging what someone says, which is something you should learn to do once in a while.

Posted by D.Z. at February 9, 2008 7:18 PM

comment #34

SpinDozer says ...

'Global cooling news:

http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

It appears that changes in the sun have much more to do with earth temperatures while:

"R. Timothy Patterson..."

Ordinarily, when I need some top shelf Scientific reading, Investor's Business Daily is the first place I go to. R. Timothy Patterson's statement is a bit more than a day late, his testimony before commons committee was in 2005, the source of the quote. He is a member of the Friends Of Science group that has been funded by the oil industry, he recently spoke at the Heartland Institute (front group) conference; Heartland is funded by Philip Morris & Exxon to push scepticism of scientific basis for regulation. He was a featured member of nitwit Sen. Jim inhofe's '400 "prominent" scientists who poo-poo-d all over well, more prominent & numerous scientists efforts last year. In 2007 he was described as "recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic" (funny how that happens) even though he has been heavily involved in what can only be described as pimping for industry since 2002. He is a rotten plumb but ripe for the picking of any non-discriminating pajamahadeen mook.

Posted by SpinDozer at February 9, 2008 8:42 PM

comment #35

SpinDozer says ...

Just in case you want to know how the revelation that the sun is "responsible" for Global Warming has rocked the Scientific Community...

http://inel.wordpress.com/2007/07/10/new-analysis-counters-claims-that-solar-activity-is-linked-to-global-warming/

Study undermines climate scepticsâ€™ arguments
Â· Correlations â€˜inconsistentâ€™ with temperature riseJames Randerson, science correspondent
Wednesday July 11, 2007
The Guardian

"It has been one of the central claims of those who challenge the idea that human activities are to blame for global warming. The planetâ€™s climate has long fluctuated, say the climate sceptics, and current warming is just part of that natural cycle - the result of variation in the sunâ€™s output and not carbon dioxide emissions.

But a new analysis of data on the sunâ€™s output in the last 25 years of the 20th century has firmly put the notion to rest. The data shows that even though the sunâ€™s activity has been decreasing since 1985, global temperatures have continued to rise at an accelerating rate."

There are, of course, many other sources that say the same thing.

Posted by SpinDozer at February 9, 2008 9:45 PM

comment #36

le corbeau says ...

My God, you're tiresome.

Posted by le corbeau at February 9, 2008 9:56 PM

comment #37

SpinDozer says ...

You're the expert.

Posted by SpinDozer at February 9, 2008 10:03 PM

comment #38

christian says ...

Facts are tiresome to most conservatives these days.

Posted by christian at February 9, 2008 11:16 PM

comment #39

le corbeau says ...

Spinny-- Did you touch your butt and make a sizzling sound when you came up with that one?

Christian-- that's a rich one coming from the guy I've chased around this site 20 times with documented facts. How about that Lancet study? Come up with one solid economic indicator proving this is worse than the Depression yet?

Posted by le corbeau at February 10, 2008 6:32 AM

comment #40

SpinDozer says ...

'Did you touch your butt and make a sizzling sound when you came up with that one?'

The comment was sincere. You would be the expert at whether I am, in fact, tiresome.

Posted by SpinDozer at February 10, 2008 7:57 AM

comment #41

christian says ...

How about that Lancet study?

I provided you with plenty of links defending their study and you had nothing to retort to with the new ORB study showing over a million dead.

I never once said things were "worse than the depression" -- that's just how your right-wing filtering system deals with deviations from your ideology.

Mgmax, the economy is not doing well. You can't spin your way from the truth. Is it 1929 yet? No, but again, I guess life is better now than if I was a slave in Africa in 1876, so maybe we should all STFU.

Posted by christian at February 10, 2008 10:25 AM

comment #42

D.Z. says ...

christian: Actually, there's nothing wrong with saying that things are worse than The Depression. After all, this time it's our currency which is in trouble, and not the currencies of the entire world.

Posted by D.Z. at February 10, 2008 11:24 AM

comment #43

le corbeau says ...

SpinDozer, do you know what the secret of comedy is?

It's...

um...

wait a minute, I have it here...

shit, what did I do with it...

hmm, look at that... the stormy petrel is the only migratory bird which has a--

what?

Oh, right. Timing.

Posted by le corbeau at February 10, 2008 1:41 PM

comment #44

SpinDozer says ...

Thanks for the tip. Tell ya what, I'll put (joke) at the conclusion of every attempt to make funny. I have retroactively applied to my post of 7:57 ayem. Please see the revised post.

Posted by SpinDozer at February 10, 2008 3:55 PM

comment #45