“…the old will she or won’t.. Of course, though, if you actually look at what’s going on in front of you, she’s acting like a candidate.” – Chuck Todd [The Daily Rundown]
THE ONE lesson it’s obvious that Hillary Clinton learned from 2008 is that discipline has great value. Long before Game Change was published, the leaks in the press from some quarters of her first campaign for president filled the pages of new media sites and flooded cable talk shows. The reviews of a campaign lacking discipline sticking to the campaign. That was then. Today all that’s in view is Hillary’s discipline, a sign of who is running things in her life today and it isn’t a guy named Bill.
This is the story we’re watching play out, it’s just no one wants to write it, because most of the people covering HRC are blinded by an agenda that doesn’t matter. A gossipy mix of expected dish, with the reporting that counts embedded and buried.
One example, Politico’s Maggie Haberman’s entertaining post.
The question of whether Clinton is helping or hindering fellow Democrats could prove critical for the party in the event that she declines to run, which top donors and officials reluctantly acknowledge is possible for a variety of reasons. If she eventually passes, it could leave the party with little time to devise a backup plan with what many strategists privately call a dearth of viable replacements. – Maggie Haberman [Politico]
Hillary not announcing now, in 2014, 7 months before the 2014 midterms, one year before any serious Republican makes his decision to run (because there will be no women running in 2016), is a “delayed decision,” according to Haberman.
“…realistically, I realize no one wants to go up against the Hillary Juggernaut. But really, if 10 months from now she decides she’s not running, the candidates with real support should have no problem building what they need to run a credible campaign. It may not be enough time to buy support, but those Democrats who have spent time cultivating a real grass-roots base should have no trouble.. Worst case, everyone will be equally disadvantaged, which means an even playing field. And that’s all that matters.” – Markos Moulitsas [Politico]
This is Haberman’s analysis:
Still, Hillary Clinton’s delayed decision, as super PACs have sprouted up around, has frustrated some Democrats. The concern has taken on a more urgent tone in private conversations among Democrats who know that some of Clinton’s close friends are urging her to take a pass.
Joe Scarborough recently said on “Morning Joe” that he’s hearing from people that Hillary Clinton may not run, too.
Meanwhile, nobody in Hillaryland is talking, least of all former Secretary Hillary Clinton.
What HRC is doing is public appearances.
Lots of them.
Chuck Todd schooled his colleagues today, which was worth highlighting, because it happens so seldom.
Clinton’s being honored, giving speech after speech, her schedule becoming fuller with each passing week. On Monday she’ll be in Texas on an invitation by Jeb Bush to talk about education. Mrs. Clinton is being feted across the American landscape, the belle of any ball that’s fortunate enough to have gotten their request in early enough to have their wish granted.
Without a solid “SHE’S RUNNING!” story, which this far out from 2016 is preposterous to expect, the political media, as well as Hillary’s adversaries, are left to their imaginations, which is always a dangerous thing to do with these folks. They’re now stuck concocting a story somewhere between a blame Hillary scenario for “freezing the Democratic 2016 field,” and how Hillary simply doing speeches and reaching out on issues could “hinder fellow Democrats” and prove “critical for the party in the event she declines to run.”
Haberman opines that Clinton not deciding now “could leave the party with little time to devise a backup plan with what many strategists privately call a dearth of viable replacements.” She ignores her own reporting, preferring her own faulty analysis, even though in the very next sentence she quotes a “former Obama adviser,” who says, rightly, “Since the Clinton camp has sent just about every smoke signal that she’s in…”
The only one talking is Hillary, through speeches and benefits honoring her, so everyone better settle in, maybe considering covering the issues she’s talking about? Because she’s got no reason to announce her candidacy right now and nothing anyone can say will push her to do anything before she wants to.
It’s a discipline that wasn’t seen in 2008. Hillary out front, everyone in Hillaryland silent, Bill’s Clintonland is, too. A sure sign of one lesson learned. …the hard way.
“She as much as anyone knows that running for President is a very personal and weighty decision that people need to make on their own timeline, based on whatever factors they want to take into account.” – Nick Merrill [Clinton spokesperson, in an email to Politico]
Clinton is who she is and she must be covered.
The problem is that journalists, cable hosts and everyone in between can’t see the writing on the wall, preferring to listen to people who don’t have a clue because Hillaryland isn’t talking.
“I think the notion that Hillary Clinton is hurting anybody by not making a decision in early 2014 is patently absurd.” Joel Benenson, Obama’s pollster [Politico]
There’s a very good political piece between the usual fluff political writers prefer when writing about HRC. It’s just buried in bullshit.
“Democrats privately say…,” the Politico piece drones on.
Americans say the best or most positive thing about a possible Hillary Clinton presidency — if she were to run and be elected in 2016 — would be her serving as the first female president in the nation’s history. Other positives mentioned by at least 5% of Americans are her experience, that she would bring about change from the previous two administrations, that she would adhere to a Democratic agenda, and that she would be the best choice. – Clinton’s Top Selling Point in 2016: First Female President [Gallup]