Roll Of The Dice

The Politico has a very unflattering analysis of Hillary Clinton's campaign to date written by Elizabeth Drew. Pulled all together, the "herky-jerky" campaign's wobbles from one ditch to the next look, if anything, worse than each incident taken alone. Drew points out that the Clinton campaign is now really dependent on Bill Clinton's ability to garner support for Hillary - not at all what was originally intended.

Her campaign had begun by tagging her, simply, “Hillary.”

She would win this thing on her own.

Everyone knew that her husband would be there somewhere in the background, dispensing advice — but Bill and the memories he summons were to be on the sidelines.

Then, when her supposed juggernaut campaign fell into a ditch in Iowa, Bill was called to the rescue.

The Hillary Clinton campaign for the presidency has had an odd herky-jerky quality, marked by multiple and unsubtle switches in strategy — they were practically trumpeted by her aides — giving off an aura of uncertainty behind the sense of inevitability it had carefully cultivated. (Which much of the media bought into.)

The 350-page, state-by-state memo produced last summer by Mark Penn, her chief strategist, purportedly showing that she was the overwhelming favorite led to miscalculations.

The presumption of “inevitability” didn’t go down so well with voters who thought they should have a say in the matter.

Some women registered resentment at being expected to vote for her because of her gender.

As she began to sink in Iowa, her campaign leaked to some newspapers that this was because they hadn’t realized until October how up close and personal a campaign in Iowa must be; but since she had on her side former Gov. Tom Vilsack and other prominent political figures in the state, who certainly knew the rules, this assertion didn’t wash.

(So much for the “textbook campaign” the media had been crediting her with — whatever that meant. Has anyone seen a copy?)

Drew assembles quite a lot more. As I said, it is not a pretty picture. I've posted about the weirdly frenetic Clinton campaign for a while now. It does appear to be lurching about trying to find a message that works - but they roll something out, then turn around and roll out something completely new the next day. All of that makes Clinton look less inevitable and more like she's floundering. The problem with relying on Bill Clinton for votes should be obvious - who is really campaigning - and who will really be in charge? Let's face it, Clinton has a huge war chest and big operations in most states these days - but devastating losses in Iowa and New Hampshire could be a real problem for the Clintonian machine. We'll see soon enough, now. Only a few more days.