"to this transparent attempt at manipulation,"

Call me naive, but I believe it's real. There's so much about her that is fake, scripted and politicized, but I believe this is real.

I also believe that NH believed it to be true. Polls had Obama leading Hillary by almost nine points, as of yesterday, and he's going to lose by two. That's an eleven point swing. This swing means that something happened nearly overnight. I think that this vulnerable moment, real or not, turned the tide for Clinton and basically took away any momentum that IA gave BO. (Heh, his initials are BO)

I think that Hillary is a horrible speech-giver and overall poor communicator. Watching her "victory" speech tonight was painful. The clip you have isn't painful to watch, unless you're a tad cynical.

I posted this last week, but I think that Hillary will win this nomination. I don't know when it will happen, but the "air of inevitability" will return if she wins a couple more of these in a row.

What's funny is that the local TV news broadcast broke away for the beginning of her speech. Almost immediately, in mid-sentence, the screen went blank and they cut back to the news. "Quick, quick, before we lose our whole audience FOREVER!"

I see where you're coming from. I don't doubt that she has some genuine emotions, and some of those may have been coming out. But what I take away from the video is that her emotions are in the back seat while the politics are driving every word. Even on the verge of tears she can't help herself but to lapse into talking points about Obama's experience.

And how many statements can you name more bizarre than "I have so many opportunities for this country?"

Given the last seven years of our current President's verbal . . . er . . . issues, I could probably find enough to keep the Thinkling Quote-a-matic going for a decade or so.

She will have my vote. I believe it is real also. And she was right we are spinning out of control with no one helping us. Change must happen. I work with the hard working folks and I get to talk to folks about how they believe from God to politics they want change-they need change.

I now owe the jar some cash. *-*

Maybe this is naive, but after reading what you wrote, I totally wasn't expecting it to be the "emotional in the diner" clip.

I think this type of cynicism could be applied to all candidates.

And how many statements can you name more bizarre than "I have so many opportunities for this country?"

This is what I was talking about in my first comment in regards to her lack of speaking ability. She doesn't communicate well. You'd think that Yale Law (it was Yale Law, right?) would have taught her something about thinking on her feet.

She probably exited her time at New Haven very well-spoken, but a life of having to say the exact right thing at the exact right time (a la Carville and Stephanopolous) warped her into the stale-voiced, stilted speaker she is now.

That's what happened in that November debate when she was pressed on her views regarding illegals and drivers licenses. She was forced to think of an answer that had not yet been scripted in her political career. (If she had just said yes or no, she would have been fine. She could even have been wrong and apologized later. That incident was as bad as losing IA)

Before someone attacks me for being sexist, my discomfort with her has little to do with the fact that she's a woman. I think it would be cool for a woman to be in the White House, provided she's a good leader. If Clinton2 gets into the White House and something off-script occurrs (which will likely happen on the first day and daily afterwards), she'll be trying to force out the political response. This isn't the senate where one can sit on their butt and talk with others for a while before coming together on a plan of action. It's just her. And the time period for decision making will be considerably shortened.

This is why Rudy is even a part of this race. (or is he?) It's because his quick thinking, correct decision making and overall great leadership carried the world through 9/11 while the President was (justifiably) evasive-maneuvering in Air Force One over God-knows-where. He proved that he can lead during a crisis. I am not at all confident in Clinton, in this regard.

What would she have done with the Iran "provocation" this past Monday? If she makes the wrong move, we could be sending loaded planes to Teheran right now. It's actually quite frightening to think of her as a Commander of anything, much less Commander in Chief of our armed forces.

I should mention that I also have differences with her in regards to the fact that she doesn't mind if people kill others in the name of convenience and would even go so far as to make the United States an accomplice in the act.

I heard the guys on my local talk radio station make a big deal about this before I saw it myself. They were talking about whether a person who cries has the emotional stability to to be the leader of the free world etc...

I saw the clip. You know what? In my opinion, no big deal. She didn't cry. She got a little choked with emotion. So what. That happens to me sometimes. I think that for her it was genuine - since Bush is the Nazi Anti-Christ and all.

And if Hillary becomes President, my crying fit will make hers look like she was laughing with glee.

The reason I considered it a "jump the shark" kind of moment is she went from trying to portray herself as a strong, experienced woman who has been in public life a long time and has the moxy to stand up to foreign leaders to woman who wants to cry because someone else might get elected.

I don't think the statement I cited was a Bush-esque verbal gaffe. I think it portrays the way she thinks, which is that whether we the people have genuine opportunities to succeed depends on her getting elected, and she has all these good things she's waiting to give us only if she's elected. That's really a fundamental divide between her thinking and what America is about.

"she went from trying to portray herself as a strong, experienced woman who has been in public life a long time and has the moxy to stand up to foreign leaders to woman who wants to cry because someone else might get elected."

Maureen Dowd's column in the NYT pointed this out, as well. The first thing that brought her to tears in her long political career was the realization that she might lose. Heh. (BTW, I usually stay away from Dowd, but the title of her column caught my eye)


"I don't think the statement I cited was a Bush-esque verbal gaffe."

I see what you're saying now and you're exactly right. The idea that she is the only one who brings something to the table is ludicrous. Obama brings much to the table, although there's a strong argument that he would be a worse President than she would. (And that's saying something.)

If all of the Republican candidates were wiped out kind of like that King Ralph movie with John Goodman and I had to vote for one of the Democrats, I'd probably go with Richardson - even though I believe that people who eat the junk that is New Mexican food are likely off their rocker.

My two cents: I think her emotion is genuine here, but her perspective is terribly selfish. She really does appear to have a messiah complex. That's what I got from what I heard of her victory speech last night (listening to NPR). I don't think this is a jump the shark moment, but it could be just one more thing that is turning off some voters. She can't be the leader and the victim at the same time. This time she was the victim, but that does appeal to a few voters. I think Obama's inspirational rhetoric will win out of this, but we'll see.

I agree with Quaid and Raindream; and I too was struck by Maureen Dowd, who was memorably cutting, as she so often is:

There was a poignancy about the moment, seeing Hillary crack with exhaustion from decades of yearning to be the principal rather than the plus-one. But there was a whiff of Nixonian self-pity about her choking up. What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her… At her victory party, Hillary was like the heroine of a Lifetime movie, a woman in peril who manages to triumph. Saying that her heart was full, she sounded the feminist anthem: ‘I found my own voice.’

What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her

Bingo.

I believe there was nothing real about her cry. It was very short and not much anyway and the media ran with it like it was Tom Cruse jumping on Oprah's couch.

As far as the big lead in the polls. It only appeared for one day right before the votes. I believe it was not real but just a way to make her small victory seem huge because of a comeback story. James Carville is back and knows his stuff. That is what is happening.

Is he really? I didn't know that the ragin cajun was working again.

He's so tight.

From what I've read, insiders are saying that Carville has been talking to Clinton, but the campaign is denying that he & Begala are coming on board.

But come on-- when did Carville stop working for the Clintons?

I think the demographics and the procedures are so different between Iowa & NH that there's no sense concluding that anything changed in the electorate as a whole between the two contests.

Heard the speech extract first on radio. Video makes the transparency even more startling.

What scares me about the country lies in a two item juxtaposition. First, as post 12 notes: "Bingo." Second: post 4's "She will have my vote."

Roy she still has my vote.
I think some would be saying how refreshing it is if it were a Rep man saying this stuff.

I voiced my opinion on my blog you are welcome to say it there.

Ya’ll come.

Can't believe I'm commenting on a political post . . .

A few things:

1. If a man OR a woman intentionally manufactures tears on the campaign trail to get votes, and people buy it and actually change their vote, that says more bad things about people than it does about the candidate. The gender doesn't matter to me - Clinton was always biting his lip and feeling my pain and I didn't like that either. If Bush was always faking tears it would turn me off. As PJ O'Rourke once said (I Paraphrase), give me some dull Cincinnatus like Eisenhauer or Coolidge who will perform their Presidential duties with calm and efficiency, and then go back to the plow when they're done being President. All of the things that Presidents "do" for us are not gifts or benefices, bequeathed from on high. We pay for every one of them - sometimes with our money, sometimes with our skins. (end paraphrase)

2. I don't think Hillary manufactured the tears. I think they were genuine (or mostly so).

3. I don't see how it could possibly matter that she cried in some Portsmouth diner, but I heard women on the radio last night actually admitting that they changed their vote because of it.

4. And, since we live in the age of Oprah now, you can't "just" cry in a Portsmouth diner. No, now it has to mean something. You are now the Rosa Parks of Emotional Emancipation, not just for yourself, but for all of your downtrodden sisters all over the world. As Hillary said yesterday:

"Maybe I have liberated us to actually let women be human beings in public"

And I just don't know how I can add anything to that . . . Good grief.

I just watched it again. I am not blaming her for trying but I also cannot see (Just my opinion) how anyone could listen to this whole thing in context and not believe this was all strategy.

Her tear may have been from genuinely emotional feelings. But someone told her, hey show your emotion, let everyone know your real and that all of your opponents are real, but you’re the one who is ready and able to get to work.

If you have never watched the documentary “The War Room” from Mr. Clintons campaign you should see it. Him and Carville and others were brilliant in seeing this stuff and implementing it.

By the way a lot of good sourses are saying Carville is back. But it is like someone said ealier, he never really left.

So, does John Kerry's endorsement of Obama help or hurt Obama?

Do you think Obama would gain anything with a moral vision for the country--you know, a speech on faithfulness to family and respecting yourself?

If you have never watched the documentary “The War Room” from Mr. Clintons campaign you should see it. Him and Carville and others were brilliant in seeing this stuff and implementing it.

They all do this.

Milly, that may be true to a degree, although I think Bill Clinton brought it to an art form.

And while every politician who has his wits about him will want to know which way the wind is blowing, Bill Clinton that sniffing the wind is the essence not just of campaigning, but governing the country.

Bill may have had better people working for him but the bottom line is that they all have spin. W and his men couldn't keep it up because we aren't so stupid that we can see our lives and those who are dying around us.

You could go back to the beginning of the American Presidency and find spin. It’s what they do. If you smack hard on one you have to smack the others.

So, Milly, is your's essentially an anti-war vote? Is that the main issue for you?

I consider Bush the Republican answer to Clinton.

Bush got elected because he was the anti-Clinton. Clinton was the master manipulator and spin-meister. He could sell a Ford Excursion to Algore. Bush is clumsy with words, ill-spoken, has a temper when he's challenged or asked to think in any way.

They both tried to marginalize the other side by trying to solve problems that justified the existence of the other party. For Clinton, the key example is welfare reform. For Bush, it was education and prescription drug benefits. Each hoped taking away the opponents' key issues would leave them weak.

Each took risks with proposals they strongly believed in. For Clinton, it was health care and gays in the military. For Bush, it was the war and tax cuts.

The difference is that Clinton cared when the public turned against him (about a policy, at least). He would quickly throw his buddies (even his wife) under the bus in order to bob back to the top of the opinion polls. Bush, whether it's his credit or his crime, hasn't really done that. In fact, it's a large part of why his second term has been in such a funk.

That's not to deny that the Bush administration worked hard at spin. The difference is that Clinton worked hard to match his proposals to public opinion, whereas Bush's handlers are often handicapped by his stubbornness in sticking to unpopular policies.

So, Milly, is your's essentially an anti-war vote? Is that the main issue for you?

No but Mark said it very well on my blog

Mark said...
It was Eagleton who cried, McGovern's first VP candidate. But the allegations of a mental break down probably did in the campaign more than the tears.

The current administration has peeked in our bedrooms, read our mail, ran up the largest debt in history, ignored our schools and roads, and you are worried about Hillary?


I will support the Democratic nominee, our economy could be in trouble with 8 more years like the past 8, not to mention our personal rights and civil liberties.

I've known Mark my whole life al lof 47 years and we have gone toe to toe on issues this one we agree on.

That's a bit harsh, Alan. You think Bush's second term was in a funk b/c he didn't listen to polls and pundits?

One thing I've always found refreshing about Bush (and you can love him or hate him) - he doesn't live and die by opinion polls. I've always thought that when his term's over, he'll go back to the ranch and sleep well at night. I think history will be much kinder to him than current conventional wisdom, but, of course, many will disagree. I'm OK with that :-)

One reason I'll be glad when Bush is done: I'm sick of Bush derangement syndrome and Bush-hatred. Bush has "peeked in our bedrooms"? How so?

I just got back from Ukraine, and seen how people live there. Our economy kicks royal butt. Everyone who's honest knows that (when they can pry themselves away from all the expensive toys they're playing with at all times, including blogging). But since we're in perpetual election cycle here in the US, we have to talk about how horrible everything is all the time.

Bush also ignored our schools and roads, because, of course, it's the job of the President of the United States to fix potholes on local roads and run our school boards.

By the way, you haven't seen potholes (or exciting driving) till you've driven a Ukrainian road.

The high schools in my area are the best I have ever seen. They blow away what I had when I was that age. But, of course, the current template is that all our schools are falling apart, because Bush is too busy enriching his fatcat friends to care.

Silly.

I'll be glad when the election's over. We'll at least get a 2 week break or so before Election 2012 starts up.

De,
Without a doubt this is a great country. We are very blessed, some of us. I work in an area where I see what happens when all is lost. I too like many of my co-workers turn away from what we see. But the truth is in our faces day in and day out. I spend a lot of time talking to those who work hard and I mean hard for a living. Yes they chose that life but I also listen to what they have to say. They are unhappy and want change.

I hand picked the schools my children attend, they are the best in the area. I chose this house in the better neighborhood and I work to pay for it. Sure I have more than I need. I realize it and thank God for the place I’m in.

Yes it’s also a great country because in others we (I) would have been shot for my crimes of speaking out. My daddy didn’t raise me to keep my opinions to myself. He proudly agrees BTW.

The problem has been that we were to suck it all up and not worry. We are to just take it because that’s what they want us to do. I do think Bush will sleep well after and that is one reason I want him and his buddies out. I wouldn’t sleep well at all. I would care about what I did and how it went. That’s another reason I’m glad Mark never has chosen to run for office I’d hate for my bro to send us to a war we can’t get out of and the body counts would kill me. It hurt me when we were in Nam as a young person, I hate it more so now.

No war isn’t the only reason there are many others. I'd vote Rep in a heart beat if I saw one who would do well. I just don't.

Raindream, I'm not really saying that he should've been shifting his policies with the polls. But he has (as De indicates) a tendency to dig in his heels. Whether history judges him well or poorly for that, who knows (I happen to think history has as many blind spots as the present does). Where Clinton made a virtue of being poll-driven, Bush has counted it a vice.

I happen to disagree with a lot of what he's done, but probably not for the same reasons that drive his poll numbers down.

It should be clear that, regardless of whether Bush has been correct, his commitment to certain unpopular policies has weakened he and his party, preventing the party from staying in power and accomplishing anything at all during the last two years of his term.

Milly

Well, one reason I like you is because you care.

"The problem has been that we were to suck it all up and not worry. We are to just take it because that’s what they want us to do."

It's this kind of talk I don't understand. Who has told you you can't care, that you just have to "take it"? Who has told you not to worry? The last 7 years have been nothing if not a vast worry, "we're not gonna take it" fest in this country. That's one thing that makes this country great. You have the right to not take it. No one has squelched that, neither will they. Every two years we get to vote in or out our representatives, and every four years our President. It's beautiful.

"I do think Bush will sleep well after and that is one reason I want him and his buddies out. I wouldn’t sleep well at all. I would care about what I did and how it went."

I want to make clear that I didn't mean to imply that Bush doesn't care about the casualties. I believe he does, deeply. But he believes this is the right course for fighting the WOT, for defeating Al Queda, for bringing stability to the Middle East. Now, of course, many (maybe most) of the people reading this disagree with that, perhaps vehemently. But what I meant was that he has followed his convictions - he will go to bed knowing that he did what he believed was right.

he has followed his convictions - he will go to bed knowing that he did what he believed was right.

I certainly agree with that.

Alan, Republicans in congress are to blame for losing the house and senate, not Bush. Their scandals, their weaknesses, and their trend toward liberalism are the reasons they are losing ground with voters. The unpopularity of the Iraq war did help them lose too, but without the other things, I don't think they would have lost.

About the post's topic, I heard on the radio that Mrs. Clinton's attitude and actions off camera argue against her tears being geniune, or at least that she was tearful only over the idea that she would lose the election. I tried to find an article to that effect online, but I couldn't. Sorry if it's idle rumor.

You're right that the conduct of congressional Republicans is a big factor. But the corruption issue (such as it was) reached into the White House as well with the Scooter Libby case.

You’re still my favorite De.
I do care.

I have been told by Reps that we should suck it up and that my views are way wrong. Still it’s the best country ever.
The fact that Bush might think he was right is frightening to me, then again that’s how you live with yourself when you make war.

Now the song is in my head.
We're not gonna take it, no we're not gonna take it. . . .

"The fact that Bush might think he was right is frightening to me, then again that’s how you live with yourself when you make war."

That may be true. But almost every president, Democrat or Republican alike, has made these same kinds of decisions. How many people were killed in Kosovo due to Clinton's decision to bomb them (those numbers are never published)? FDR, Truman, Johnson, all made those decisions. So did Reagan and Bush I.

None of these men are seen as monsters.

I don't think GWB will be seen as a monster in years to come.

I will be glad when he's out of office, though - if only because it will end these kinds of conversations. It's one thing to argue about decisions, it's another entirely to keep having to defend the humanity of someone. The next President will have his or her chance to complete the efforts in Iraq. My view is that they will inherit a situation even more stable than the one we have now (which is stabilizing more every day), and will be able to quietly and hopefully with wisdom draw down the troops (not to zero, but less than we have now). Iraq will disappoint many, never having become the unmitigated disaster they dreamed it would be (and, speaking of frightening, the thought that there are people in this country hoping it all goes to heck in a handcart just so they can hurt GWB politically . . . well, it's hard to know what to say about that).

We should all pray for peace.

We should all pray for peace.

I have been.

I wasn't for the war but hoped that it would be a right decision. I get feeling that you might need to defend a president I voted for Clinton.
;-}
We had to say over and over again I don't care about the chick.

I never thought Bush2 was a monster. I’m sure other have. Making war is hard and to be honest I doubt that he slept well or will sleep well. How can you when so many think you are so wrong? That must play on your head at some point.

I don’t want my friends to go. Praying for peace.

De, I don't think those discussions will go away. They will just change focus, because the subject (Bush or someone else) isn't the source of the talk. The source is the person who is wiling to believe such foolishness. The Cheney impeachment is a good example.

Alan, I don't blame anyone in the White House for what happened with Valerie Plame. That whole thing was a plot to discredit or undermine Bush. If Libby tripped up in his testimony, I feel for him, but wasn't the point of the whole thing that Plame was or was not covert? She was not, and yet they say Libby said something he shouldn't have. Madding. Almost as bad as the Duke Lacrosse case.