Hillary’s “mistake strategy” is a mistake
From the NYT today (h/t to Matt Yglesias):
Mark Penn, Mrs. Clinton’s chief strategist, said in an interview: “It’s important for all Democrats to keep the word ‘mistake’ firmly on the Republicans and on President Bush. Senator Clinton has been very clear that we, as a party, should keep the focus on Bush — these were his mistakes. Ultimately that’s very important, not just for her, but for the entire Democratic party.â€
I’m all for tough politics, but to say that Bush was the only one who made the mistake on Iraq is just too dishonest for me: the Democrats who voted for the resolution made a mistake as well and so did all the pundits (some of whom claim to be liberal) who refused to condemn the war. I’m all for using the war to attack the Republican party. But if we as a nation don’t learn from our mistakes as well, it will be a hollow victory that we achieve. I say that as someone who opposed the war, but only did so tepidly. In retrospect, I feel ashamed that I didn’t pay more attention to what was going on at the time. That was my mistake and I admit it.
Related posts:
I would tend to agree that Hillary continually makes poor political judgments; however a little perspective is important. If your mechanic tells you that you need a new brake caliper and you authorize him to fix it, later if you found out that the problem was a bad brake line would you blame yourself? Clearly the decision you made wasn’t in error given the situation presented to you.
That being said somebody on Hillary’s strategy team needs to remind her that before you can win the presidency you need to win a primary. As far as I go, her tendency to make the right political move ( or what her bungling strategists think is the right political move) while seemingly avoiding taking a moral stand on anything ( See her sad attempts to support a flag burning law) ensures that I’ll be standing with the Draft Gore group. We can’t afford another candidate who appears to make every decision only after consulting pollsters and focus groups. Al Gore’s strong opposition to the war from day one and leadership on many key issues makes him seem to be the candidate of choice. (But apparently not since he isn’t even included on the poll in the sidebar)
Hillary clearly wants to peg the war on Bush because if she admits she made the wrong choice, she risks the perception that she lacks the judgment necessary to fight terror. The only problem with her consultants’ rather transparent logic is that possessing good judgment also means admitting when you are wrong. If you react to the mechanic scenario by saying “It wasn’t my fault, the mechanic lied to me”, it makes you no less of a fool for not verifying her claim.
Especially among primary voters, there exits a palpable frustration that Democrats capitulated to Bush’s Iraq Drumbeat all too readily. In trying to appeal to the general electorate already, Clinton (and her polling firm) clearly underestimate progressives’ frustrations with spineless Democrats who failed to stand up to Bush when it mattered most.
Hillary’s right to blame Bush, but she refuses to accept that she must shoulder some of the blame as well.
The tragedy here is that Sen. Clinton could be an excellent candidate and a brilliant president if she didn’t have all the political sense of a pithed frog. She just doesn’t seem to understand that she, more than any other candidate, has the freedom speak her mind and act as she pleases. 16 years of smear campaigns by anti-Clinton forces mean that everyone knows about her and few people are going to change their minds. She could use this freedom to speak to important issues such as the ballooning federal deficit, rising income inequity and the healthcare crisis and propose bold solutions, yet she doesn’t, which just reinforces her image as a craven apparachnik.