How To Win
I have seen a few items about this pop up today, but waited a bit to post about it. Is a serious dislike of Hillary Clinton enough to head her off in the presidential race? A lot of smart people think that it is not - most definitely.
That wasn’t the limit of the Hillary effect. The National Republican Senatorial Committee saw its donations surge when it asked supporters to banish the Clintons from Washington once and for all. By the middle of 2000, the committee raised $20 million, twice as much as it had raised in 1998 and triple what it raised in 1996. “She’s now the Republican Party’s No. 1 fundraiser,” said a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee to a reporter from The Hill.
It was a simpler time. This past July, the National Republican Senatorial Committee sent out a “quiz” to donors that warned, “Hillary Clinton is calling Senate Democrats to push a passage of measures to institute government-run healthcare.” Imagine, a President Hillary Clinton with a massive Senate majority to do her bidding! But appeals like that have done nothing for the NRSC: their Democratic counterparts have out-raised them by $34.1 to $18.1 million. The month of the quiz letter, the Democrats beat them by $2.7 to $2.2 million.
It’s the same story in the presidential race. Since the start of the year, the nine remaining Republican candidates have raised about $104 million. The Democrats, including Clinton, have raised $144.3 million. When John McCain campaign manager Rick Davis sent out an 11th-hour fundraising e-mail, he played what he thought was his strongest card: “There are many reasons to support John McCain, but as we approach this quarter’s fundraising deadline Saturday at midnight, let me remind you of just one of them: John McCain is the only candidate who can defeat Hillary Clinton.” That was the prelude to a weak finance report and a staff purge that completed McCain’s descent to hobbled dark horse.
And those efforts have been absolute triumphs compared to the third-party anti-Hillary efforts and PACs. The first sign that conservative donors were growing less animated about the Clintons was the launch of Stop Her Now in February 2005. Republican strategist Arthur Finkelstein planned on raising $10 million for a campaign along the lines of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the 2004 group that raised $27 million to attack John Kerry’s Vietnam service and his homeland antiwar activism.
Finkelstein failed. The group recorded a radio ad that was never broadcast and from its founding through June 2005, reported only one $500 donation. Over the next year, Clinton glided to her Senate re-election as the group raised only $25,000, and she out-raised her opponent by nearly ten to one.
As David Weigel notes in the title of his article (worth reading the whole thing) it takes more than a dislike of Hillary Clinton to win: it takes an agenda. Some others who have weighed in have good points. James Joyner:
While negative campaigning and pointing out the weaknesses of one’s opponent can be quite effective, there hasn’t been a presidential election in my lifetime decided on that basis. (Off the top of my head, I can’t think of an example of that happening, period.) Drawing a contrast with Hillary Clinton will be effective in mobilizing the base. But Republicans won’t keep the White House if they don’t inspire the public with a positive agenda of their own. (His update addresses criticism from Kevin Drum and is worth reading just for itself. It pretty much proves the point.)
McQ at QandO:
I'm betting Republicans, regardless of how much they have to hold their nose, end up deciding that half a loaf is better than none. They know 50% of voters have said they won't vote for her. But I think they'll also know that they have to show up to make that enough to keep her out of the White House. And I think they will.
And BitsBlog:
I was about to say the reverse in the defeat of Carter… Negative campaigning was huge in Regan’s victory… the difference being it was negatives he didn’t have to spout… the American people decided on those negatives themselves… 21% inflation, Iran Hostages, gas lines, interest rates through the ceiling and the economy in the WC.
I think that the polls already indicate that a lot of Americans do not like Hillary Clinton. So that is already a huge hit against her. But the fact remains that without a real agenda to make people want to get out and vote, negatives are not enough. And there are real, good agendas the Republicans can use. Regardless of who wins the nomination, Fred Thompson's immigration plan is a political winner when more than 2/3 of voters are in favor of closing the borders. A high fence and a wide gate is a real vote getter. With a good agenda and a loathed opponent, all things are possible. Add to that a coattail effect and this election may not turn out the way the media is already pimping it. After all, Charlie Cook is worried.
Other Links to this Post
-
Blue Crab Boulevard » The Piñata Wore Pantsuits — Wednesday, 24 October , 2007 @ 6:18 am
By feeblemind, Wednesday, 24 October , 2007 @ 12:23 am
Good to see at least some commentators understand that the repubs need a message to mobilize the vote. I suspect the money may begin to flow when the repubs have a nominee and HRC officially becomes the dem nominee. All is not lost, but repub strategists need to wake up. A tall order?