Hillary’s last stand: Hillary Clinton is embarking on what an aide called a ” ‘kitchen sink’ fusillade” and what the New York Times is calling a “5-point attack” against Sen. Barack Obama to save her campaign. Let’s count: She denounced his portrayal of her stand on NAFTA, sent up his rhapsodic rhetoric, compared his foreign-policy inexperience to George Bush’s, criticized him for not separating external parties that endorse him from his own campaign, and last but not least, her aides allegedly sent around a photo of him dressed as a Somali elder (not that there’s anything wrong with that).
Liberal Kyle E. Moore at Comments From Left Field thinks Hillary’s malleability is her problem: “Obama defined himself early on, and kept to the script, be it true or merely well written fiction. By contrast, Clinton has flailed at defining herself and as a result has been defined as the dirty candidate, the mud slinger and the cheater. And every single time she adds to this definition of herself as a candidate, it only strengthens the message that Obama is running on, every attack, every promise to strong-arm superdelegates, all of it reinforcing the core concept behind the Obama message that American politics need to be changed.”
Liberal Doctor Biobrain writes: “[I]t really does look like Hillary decided to adopt many of the Republican ways of operating a campaign; but failed to really understand how they worked. They went with the Inevitable Political Machine concept, without realizing that their candidate wasn’t supposed to come off like a machine too.”
At Talking Points Memo, Greg Sargent points to how focused the Clinton camp is now on the media’s “reveling” in her defeat: “[I]t’s also possible that, given the unfortunate reality of how our political press and the freak show function, the new, even more aggrieved tone the Hillary camp is striking might only exacerbate matters for her. And paradoxically, if this happens, this will further confirm that Hillaryland’s critique of the media is right—while also serving as yet another measure of just how bleak things are looking for Hillary right now.” While Nick Beaudrot at Cogitamus thinks Democrats should nominate Clinton just to annoy the media: “The Clinton complaint that Barack Obama is getting off the hook when it comes to health care is legitimate. And the portrayal of Clinton as ‘angry’ has dipped below responsible levels routinely; no one wrote that John Edwards ‘snapped’ at Clinton and Obama when he went on a populist tirade. Local press is better on this score, as they want to write more a bit more about issues and a bit less about the middle school grudge match.”
At the New Republic’s Plank, Eve Fairbanks has Hillary flack fatigue: “Why … can’t … Clinton’s flacks … just walk off the stage?? I’m not saying they should quit; some of them are probably giving Hillary good advice behind the scenes, and obviously the press aides have to give the occasional quote. But do they have to be so public? Do they have to, daily, float so many different arguments for Hillary’s continued viability that so often insult reporters’ intelligence?”
Scared Monkeys see Clinton as “spot-on” in a sarcastic parody of Obama-speak (available here): “It’s about time Hillary, but you may have just touched on the entire substantial platform of the Obama campaign … its rhetoric and nothing more.” Allahpundit at Hot Air agrees: “Her point here is entirely fair, incidentally; near as I can tell, Obama’s master plan for uprooting the special interest kudzu in D.C. is to unleash his personal awesomeness and watch it wither in submission, like one of those fainting women at his rallies.”
David Corn doesn’t like Hillary’s last-ditch effort at populism: “Al Gore got all populist in the closing days of the 2000 presidential contest, noting he would fight for us against them—the drug companies, health insurance companies, and the like. (You know, all the folks who bought superboxes at the Democratic convention that year in the Staples Center.) Michael Dukakis veered similarly toward the end of his campaign against George H.W. Bush in 1988. Neither ended up in the White House.”
Jim Geraghty at National Review’s Campaign Spot says: “Chances are, a week from today, the Hillary Clinton campaign ends with a spectacular flameout, something on par with the Hindenberg crashing into the Titanic.” Op-Edna also thinks the end is near for Clinton, but is a tad more optimistic, believing the senator can unite the country: “Hillary is vilifying herself by damming a tide that seeks to change this nation. For the good of her nation, she should stand down. And, if, in the interest of her self-centered-ness she needs another reason, let it be to protect the legacy she touts, and that of her husband, before they find themselves doomed, like Jimmy Carter, to stand for their failures and not their many successes.” But just in case, Wonkette has the Clinton strategy for ever-important Rhode Island.
Read more about the decline and fall of the House of Clinton.