Eight years later, it is Clinton who is running for president, and Penn, 53, is her chief strategist. While not her campaign manager in name, Penn controls the main elements of her campaign, most important her attempt to define herself to an electorate seemingly ready for a Democratic president but possibly still suffering from Clinton fatigue. ~The Washington Post
Via Yglesias
This idea of Clinton fatigue has been going around for some time, and I remain unpersuaded that such a thing exists except among all those people who would never vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances and who never did vote for Clinton. Goodness knows, I am tired of Hillary Clinton, but then I am also tired of all of the presidential candidates and it is still only April 2007. As for everyone else, not only does there seem to be a troubling lack of Clinton fatigue, but there also seems to be an undue level of Clinton enthusiasm (except among the Obamaniacs). Someone needs to explain to me why the roughly two-thirds of the country that continued to approve of Bill Clinton’s performance as President through his final day are supposed to feel fatigued by the idea of another Clinton. This is especially unclear when this is after the public has experienced, in all its unpleasantness, the consequences of choosing (twice!) the candidate whose great virtue in 2000 was that he was not tied to Clinton. Remember the guy who was going to bring back integrity and honour to the office? So much for that.
An association with Clinton was once considered in certain circles the political kiss of death, but today it might be a boost. After what will be almost eight years of Bush, the appeal of some sort of return to something like the ’90s (whose nostalgic value has skyrocketed under Mr. Bush) is probably going to be a lot stronger than many are allowing. Obama is banking on the exact opposite being true, which is why he has pithced his campaign (rather incredibly) as a departure from the bad, old days of partisan bickering, but my impression of the country’s mood is not so much that it wants amity and bipartisanship as it wants the government to stop enormously screwing up everything it touches. “Let’s get back to Clinton-era levels of incompetence and corruption!” could be Hillary’s winning slogan.
All of this doesn’t mean that Clinton would be anything but a complete horror as President, but at the moment I don’t quite understand the argument for why the general public is supposed to be tired of the name Clinton. It seems to me that some people talk about Clinton fatigue as a way to counterbalance to the very real Bush fatigue that almost everyone has (perhaps it has even reached Barney). My guess is that those who want to push the “Clinton fatigue” meme the most are the people who feel bitter that Jeb Bush cannot run for President because of his last name.
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
Grumpy Old Man
Hillary is just so Leonid Brezhnev.
Two sentences out of her mouth and I want to batter my head against the walls of my padded cell.
Bill could go on at Fidelesque length with super-wonkery and bull-session type nattering, but there was no question he had a personality as well as a brain.
Hillary, on the other hand, talks pure apparatchikese.
April 29th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
tedschan
Do you think Carl Berstein’s new book will have much of an impact on her supporters?
April 30th, 2007 at 5:55 am
Maximos
Besides, if there were a sort of aural dictionary which correlated terms with their expected sounds, Clinton’s voice would be paired with the entry for “harridan”. Her voice not only possesses that ‘fingernails-on-chalkboard’ quality, but completes the stereotype of the apparatchik who, when she says that it takes a village to raise a child, really means that the village is going to take your child and inculcate in him the dogma of the collective.
Not that this stereotype is anything more than a warranted loathing of the woman’s politics exaggerated and then transposed into a familiar key, perhaps the only key a moribund right knows how to play; but this is a reason why the popular right opposes her with the slogan, “Re-defeat communism”. She just strikes a retro chord for the right, and the voice isn’t helping her.
April 30th, 2007 at 6:53 am
Christopher B. Hayes
Sadly, it sounds like Bernstein’s books is going to be a great promo for Clinton, with just enough “oh my, I didn’t know that about her!” to sound legit and give her a chance to “bare her soul before the public” (to keep with current fads). At least that’s my take on how Random House spins the thing. Who knows, maybe the promos for the book are just trying to cash in on Clinton’s adoring fan base, but the books really full of dirt. With all Bernstein’s talk about responsibility in the media, I’ll be disappointed if it’s just drumming up votes for Hillary.
Maybe Jeb Bush can send the country into ataxia by changing his name to Jeb Clinton, or maybe Jebama Clinton
April 30th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Christopher B. Hayes
Bill’s political thinking always seemed like a filtered version of Hillary’s to me, so “Re-defeat communism” seems an apt slogan, but one that she’s likely to side-step if she can remain hawkish enough to placate the enormous blood-lust that many of the right are afflicted with.
April 30th, 2007 at 8:33 am
Maximos
The slogan is not unclever at all; but what I find dismaying about it is that it is reflective of a tendency on the right to live in the remains of past conflicts, and to interpret the present by reference to a past that is truly past. Not to mention the tendency some exhibit of ascribing to policies they happen not to like origins in truly horrific systems of thought and governance. Hillary’s National Health Service would be truly bad policy, but it’s not actually communist….
April 30th, 2007 at 10:17 am
Grumpy Old Man
The “communist” label hardly applies, but her delivery is soporific in a Politburo kind of way.
That’s why the Apple commercial parody was so effective.
If she wins, national abulia cannot be far behind.
April 30th, 2007 at 10:43 am
Maximos
Well, I’d say that it alternates between the soporific and the shrill, occasionally detouring into the farcical, as when she attempts a bad Southern accent and tries emulate the diction and cadence of a strong black woman.
April 30th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Christopher B. Hayes
Seems that the Right using the past century as a metaphor for everything is a problem, demonizing yesteryear so they can be in power tomorrow. Just like Hitler demonizing Jews back in ‘33!
And Obama using the media to propagandize - just like Hitler and Goebbels working the crowd back in ‘33!
And Hillary’s voice - just like Hitler back in ‘33!
Hillary shouting “Heute Amerika, morgen die Welt!” in a Southern black accent -
just like Hitler back in ‘33!