Why Clinton is boxed in:

[cali]

She never said she was inevitable, but that was the aura her campaign chose to project.

And then suddenly- she wasn't inevitable at all.

It is virtually impossible for her to cast herself as the underdog. There's simply no place in her narrative for a comeback kid chapter. In part, this is due to her years of being seen as the prohibitive favorite, but it's also impossible to see because of who she is- the wife of a popular ex-president.

And Hillary isn't Bill. She doesn't connect with voters the way he did. She appears to want it both ways- as someone who is standing on her own two feet, and as someone joined at the hip with her husband.

She has this big problem: How to present herself now that she's not longer the big frontrunner. And she has very limited possibilities. What can she say in her speech tomorrow night if she loses decisively to Obama that won't hit the wrong note? I can't see that there's anything she can say beyond, we'll go on to fight in other states, and that's not enough of a message.

[Droopy]

1. I've got a funny feeling

this isn't going to be like 2004 where Kerry won Iowa and most every other state followed suit. But the polls are indicating an Obama win in New Hampshire so we'll see.

[cali]

3. I think you're wrong.

This schedule favors Obama. If he wins NH, he wins SC, and quite probably NV. He goes into Tsunami Tuesday with the wind at his back, and takes 14 or 15 states.

[origin1286]

2. If I'm Hill and I lose tomorrow night

My speech is basically:

We lost a tough loss here tonight. Barack Obama is a very intelligent man and deserving candidate. I congratulate him. However, only two states have voted. This fight is just beginning. I will continue to demonstrate my extensive record and hope that the voters will realize that if they elect me, they will be getting change. Barack Obama might bring a lot of change, but there is no might with me. No matter who the democratic party nominates, they're getting a strong candidate. I feel, and I hope to demonstrate to voters, that I am the strongest.

---

Basically, she has to admit they've been struggling without going negative and while softening up her rhetoric by being almost complimentary of her opponents.

See, when Hillary trashes Obama, people tune her out. Check out the groans at the CSPAN speeches when she attacks Obama. I suspect the reverse is true. If Hillary praises Obama, as John Edwards has done (and subsequently has seen a bounce in national polling), and then touts her record as being even better than that, she might capture more people. They won't tune her out before she says what she wants to say. This strategy might not work long, but if she does it well in the weeks leading up to February 5th, it might just be enough to slow Obama's momentum.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Hillary should hire you.....

What is your recommendation for Barack to remain flying high?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. penn won't let that happen.

There was a person on cspan yesterday who had been working the HIll campaign, but decided to quit and move over to Obama. Apparently there are differences of opinion and power struggles within the highest ranks of her campaign. Tensions are high, disagreements are growing, and the ego problems (Bill's hers and Penn's) are beginning to clash.

[origin1286]

10. Barack needs to...

...continue doing what he is doing. Take the high road. Continue to play up just how much he represents a change from the status quo. Play up his good judgment. Talk about how good judgment is something no amount of experience can teach. Continue to make any Clinton reference to him out to be an attack. This way if Clinton adopts my "play nice" strategy, only people who actually take the time to listen to her speak will be affected. Media reports will cover both sides and it will come out looking like same ol' same ol.

[enough already]

13. If I hear her utter "change" one more time, I'm going to vomit

Someone please take the poll results out of Mark Penn's hands.

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. If she loses New Hampshire she will be able to claim underdog status

That is the only silver lining in a dark cloud for her. The conventional wisdom will shift decisively toward an expectation that Obama will roll on to victory. To claim underdog status she will need to acknowledge that she is re-inventing her campaign down the final stretch in a break from how she ran it pre-Iowa. She will cast herself as a battler, and she has to also become more accessable to people than she was while she was in buttoned down cautious front runner mode. It will be tough to pull off and everyone knows it. So if she starts to show signs of a recovery in the face of that, yes that will be seen as a comeback and it can give her new momentum heading into Super Tuesday.

[loveangelc]

9. I don't think so. The conventional wisdom is that she was always going to win

for a whole year it was pretty much about WHEN Hillary is the nominee. Not if. I don't think that she can claim "underdog" status legitimately just because she's lost a few states after being the inevitable candidate for so long. I think that people will see her shifts in tone and message as a negative, not a positive. It will make her seem like she's doing anything to get elected which is somewhat of a narrative for her. I dont think she is out of it, but I think it will be hard, however it is doable. Also, her going on the offensive and saying "obama's a great speech maker" isn't going to connect imo.

[tkmorris]

5. Oh damnit all to HELL!

Cali, you are right.

Damn, that hurt to say. :evilgrin:

[FrenchieCat]

6. Cali,

You are right again!

[ozone_man]

11. Also boxed in as not a candidate for change.

You saw her struggle to define herself as a change candidate in the debate, but if there is a definition of status quo, it would be Clintons and their DLC party. So, Edwards and Obama aren't going to let her redefine herself as a change candidate, and that is what people want to hear. Of course asking what constitutes change is a very fair question. But she doesn't have any of the answers. Not sure Obama does either, but he shows some promise as a uniter. But I'm afraid it's going to be the same corporate economy with a fresh new face.

The task for Edwards is to let people know what that change means, where we go from here, with little help from the media. To define substance over personality cult. One big thing working in his favor is the deteriorating economy. People know in their gut where they want the change, to end the corporate strangle hold on America, and Edwards has the message that speaks to that.

[origin1286]

12. Clinton can't win on change...

Whenever she mentions the word, it will at least briefly put an image of Obama in her listeners heads. The word has become so connected to Obama that they are virtually indistinguishable in this campaign. Obama has become the poster boy for change.

Clinton needs to find another equally powerful message that resonates with voters. One that becomes the new hot and trendy idea. One that she will own.

The problem is I can't think of one right now. This just may not be her time.

[ozone_man]

14. That's right.

But she can attack the rhetoric of change, which she has done. Running as the first woman falls flat though. We all saw what Margaret Thatcher was like. A female version of Reagan. More important is the message and character and Clinton has neither that I can see.

[origin1286]

15. Attacks...

Do not work on Obama because he is seen as the innocent nice guy.

How do you react when you see someone teasing the lovable little underdog? Think about it in movies. The teaser is always the villain.

It's like that. Negative attacks against Obama backfire for this reason.

[iconocrastic]

16. You said it: HRC is no Maggie Thatcher

Not in her wildest dreams.

[sentelle]

17. Actually.....

There is one I could think of, one that would bring back positive memories of Clinton...

"Its the economy, stupid...."

[Alexander]

18. That would actually probably work.

I'm not pro-Clinton at all, but going back to that message would undoubtedly help her.

[origin1286]

19. Hm...

Are we talking about her husband's presidency?

That's tricky. She can't run on her husbands record. She'll get destroyed. All it takes is "Sure, your husband did great things for the economy. But your husband's record is irrelevant. Just because Brett Favre leads his team to the playoffs doesn't mean his wife would as well."

[ozone_man]

20. There are a few problems with that.

Clinton economics, while looking good at some levels, such as national debt, was setting up for a big economic collapse, which we are still yet to fully experience. He handed the administration over as the stock market was crashing. Bush administration has overseen the FED trying to pump it's way out of the recession, but the recession will win out eventually and it seems to be sooner than later.

Also, Clinton economic policies like NAFTA and WTO have led to the outsourcing of jobs, loss of manufacturing.

Another problem is that it was her husband's presidency, so she can't run on that. Also, people don't want to look back, they want to look forward.

If she wants to speak to how we are going to deal with the recession about to hit, and I did hear her mention the R word Saturday night, that's another story. That's what she needs to do, but more corporate economics is not going to trickle down to the middle class.