 |
| The Ohio River |
They’re sitting next to each other tonight at the debate, with few rules.
There’s been a lot of talk. Will she or won’t she attack? In an event today, a clip played on cable revealed that Clinton said she “got
a little hot over the weekend in Cincinnati.” She went on to make
the same argument in a more measured way. That will likely be the tone for tonight.
On NAFTA, Ohioans hate it, but Texans have benefited from it, so it’s a tightrope walk. On health care, it’s all been said. I wish someone would talk more about foreign policy, but I’ve been saying that for a while now.
As for hitting hard, which has been the focus of much of the discussion, the truth is that women don’t have the same luxury of rhetorical motion that
men do. That’s just a fact. Imagine Reagan’s
famous “I paid for this microphone!” line if said by Hillary
Clinton. It’s just different for us. Passion equals being called “shrill.”
Forceful arguments become bitchy, etc., etc. Dee Dee Myers, hawking her new
book, is making the same case in interviews across cable. When she said women
are at a disadvantage in the political word wars last night in an interview with Keith Olbermann, he looked like a quizzical dog listening to his owner bark in Italian. He had no
clue what Meyers was talking about.
The challenge Clinton faces at this point is that the media is now actually
asking “Which Hillary will we see tonight?” Men never get
this kind of coverage.
If traditional journalism still had real talents, we could hope the moderators
would come at both candidates with real questions, actually trying to catch
either of them off guard. Unfortunately, because there are no real TV journalists
left, Clinton is compelled to do it herself while trying to keep from being
judged “strident,” “shrill,” “bitchy,” etc., etc.
Obama will likely just plan to ride the easy handling he always gets until the clock runs out, while Clinton wonders how far is too far? If past performances have
taught us anything, Williams and Russert won’t have the chutzpah to ask tough questions, even though that’s their job.
I would love to be proven wrong.
HERE WE GO… It begins with two contrasting performances of Clinton, the closing from last week’s debate, then the clip from the negative ad; segue to the photo on Drudge. … and we’re off!
Point to Williams for going straight at top issues at the top. Will he do the same on Obama? Like ask about the trial next week? It’s pertinent.
Obama said Clinton’s gone after him, but they didn’t “WHINE” about it. It’s starting off with Obama looking a bit smug. Not a good look for him; doesn’t come across well on camera. Something to watch for. It may be a tell.
Clinton goes back at mailing: Almost as if the Rep. and the health ins. companies wrote it.
So much for not rehashing health care. Here comes NAFTA, it’s Ohio v. Texas on this one. … ..
Clinton mentions she gets the first question all of the time, invokes SNL, says she doesn’t mind, but … Does Barack need another pillow? Some audience grumbling.
Russert comes at Clinton again on NAFTA, challenging her on what she said during her husband’s presidency. It’s on the record. Clinton and Russert do not like each other. Clinton again, NAFTA work some places, not in others. Fix or opt out in 6 months of taking office.
Russert on Obama, saying AP said he was “consistently ambivalent.” Obama says “Clinton is right” on the opt out issue. … ..
Russert comes back at Clinton. These two are into it, this time on jobs.
Williams to Obama on Clinton’s line in her foreign policy speech comparing Bush to Obama. Obama goes to his strong suit: Iraq, using his judgment as an offense to her charges.
Is Obama qualified to be commander in chief, asks Williams, last week you ducked the question. About that speech on Iraq, says Clinton, but he didn’t have responsibility or have to vote. He and Clinton have voted exactly the same. The fair comparison is when they both had responsibility and action, where is the difference that gives that speech credibility? Obama threatening to “bomb” Pakistan here. Standing next to McCain, Clinton can make a better case.
Obama: Clinton facilitated and enabled Bush on Iraq. “Actionable intelligence” and Pakistan won’t strike, “we should.” Obama’s strategy is exactly what Bush just did, taking out an Al Qaeda operative. … ..
Comments are closed.