Does Hillary Know How To Lose?
Peggy Noonan asks that question in her column today in the Wall Street Journal. Does Hillary know how to take a failure, a loss with grace and dignity? Yesterday, Mitt Romney gave a lesson in class in the way in which he stood aside on the Republican side. Does Hillary Clinton have the capacity to do the same? Because, Noonan points out, Hillary Clinton is losing.
If Hillary Clinton loses, does she know how to lose? What will that be, if she loses? Will she just say, "I concede" and go on vacation at a friend's house on an island, and then go back to the Senate and wait?
Is it possible she could be so normal? Politicians lose battles, it's part of what they do, win and lose. But she does not know how to lose. Can she lose with grace? But she does grace the way George W. Bush does nuance.
She often talks about how tough she is. She has fought "the Republican attack machine" that has tried to "stop" her, "end" her, and she knows "how to fight them." She is preoccupied to an unusual degree with toughness. A man so preoccupied would seem weak. But a woman obsessed with how tough she is just may be lethal.
Does her sense of toughness mean that every battle in which she engages must be fought tooth and claw, door to door? Can she recognize the line between burly combat and destructive, never-say-die warfare? I wonder if she is thinking: What will it mean if I win ugly? What if I lose ugly? What will be the implications for my future, the party's future? What will black America, having seen what we did in South Carolina, think forever of me and the party if I do low things to stop this guy on the way to victory? Can I stop, see the lay of the land, imitate grace, withdraw, wait, come back with a roar down the road? Life is long. I am not old. Or is that a reverie she could never have? What does it mean if she could never have it?
We know she is smart. Is she wise? If it comes to it, down the road, can she give a nice speech, thank her supporters, wish Barack Obama well, and vow to campaign for him?
It either gets very ugly now, or we will see unanticipated–and I suspect professionally saving–grace.
I ruminate in this way because something is happening. Mrs. Clinton is losing this thing. It's not one big primary, it's a rolling loss, a daily one, an inch-by-inch deflation. The trends and indices are not in her favor. She is having trouble raising big money, she's funding her campaign with her own wealth, her moral standing within her own party and among her own followers has been dragged down, and the legacy of Clintonism tarnished by what Bill Clinton did in South Carolina. Unfavorable primaries lie ahead. She doesn't have the excitement, the great whoosh of feeling that accompanies a winning campaign. The guy from Chicago who was unknown a year ago continues to gain purchase, to move forward. For a soft little innocent, he's played a tough and knowing inside/outside game.
I 'll direct you over there to read the rest, including an over the top analogy (even Noonan admits it). Frankly, Noonan believes that Obama is the more difficult candidate to beat – which may be quite true. Clinton's baggage gives John McCain a much easier job. The thing is, I suspect that Hillary Clinton does not know how to lose gracefully and this could all get very ugly between the Democratic candidates.
By syn, February 8, 2008 @ 7:32 am
I am disappointed in Noonan, a couple of years ago she bashed Bush for not being Conservative enough and now she bashing Conservatives for not lock-stepping behind quazi-liberal McCain.
Honestly, Obama is reaching the Messiah status so Noonan should be praying to her creator that Hillary is the Dem’s candidate so that McCain has at least a change to win on the ‘Anyone but Clinton’ ticket.
Isn’t the entire reasoning behind nominating McCain in the first place was that he was the only one who could beat Hillary?
By feeblemind, February 8, 2008 @ 8:47 am
Rick Moran comments on Obama at Right Wing Nuthouse. He cites dem pundits that are uneasy with Obama. The shallowness of the campaign and the willingness of the supporters to look past that has them concerned. On reflection, it is a little surprising that HRC has not been able to crack his veneer. At any rate, there seems to be a fear that the repubs will be able to expose him. OTOH, Obama will want to retain the shallowness of the campaign for as long as possible. Preferably until after the election. Once he starts proposing solutions to problems he is no longer all things to all people.
By Mwalimu Daudi, February 8, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Does Hillary know how to take a failure, a loss with grace and dignity?
No. And why should she? One reason that Clinton Inc. has not folded up is the fact that Democrats crave unhinged rage mixed with sacred victimhood. Hillary “I Am The Original Victim Of The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” Clinton believes that she – and she alone – should rule America, and that anyone who gets in her way must be destroyed. No wonder Democrats still love her!
By ted goldman, February 8, 2008 @ 10:17 am
The “gangster” politics collectively practiced by the Clintons is catching up to them, in spades.
By syn, February 8, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
Gangster politics may be catching up with the Clintons but the rest of us are paying in spades.
I never imagined that Democrats who adored the Clinton and their happy 90’s years are now so fearful of the Clintons they managed to blackmail the ‘Vast Right-Wing’ into nominating basically a Liberal War Hawk.
I’d like to ask Peggy Noonan who destroyed Conservatism more than her accusation a couple of years ago that it was all Bush’s fault; was it Clinton, Democrats or the Liberal War Hawk.