TNR BLOGS

July 02, 2009 | 6:45 PM
July 02, 2009 | 5:45 PM
July 02, 2009 | 3:08 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
08.05.2008
Is Dick Morris Making Sense?

Yesterday, Dick Morris wrote this in The Hill, dismissing the idea that Hillary would adopt the Mike Huckabee "play nice" strategy for the remainder of her campaign:

Hillary won’t avail herself of that option because it does not serve her long-term fallback position: a shot at the nomination in 2012. If Obama is elected this year, he will seek reelection in 2012 and Hillary would have to face taking on an incumbent in a primary in her own party if she wanted to run, a daunting task. But if McCain wins, the nomination in 2012 will be open. And it might be worth having. McCain will be 76 years old and the Republican Party will have been in power for 12 years. Not since FDR and Truman has a party lasted that long in power. When the Republicans tried to do so, in 1980 and 1992, they fell flat on their face.

Hillary is using white, blue-collar fears of Barack Obama to try to stop him from getting nominated or elected.

She is playing on his “elitism” by hammering him on blue-collar issues and is mincing no words in painting him as a stranger to blue-collar white America.

Hillary is attracting the votes of cops, firefighters, construction workers, union members. Are they in love with Hillary? They can’t stand her. But they are terrified of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers and the various influences to which Obama seems to be subject. By playing on those fears, Hillary is undermining Obama’s ability to get elected.

This is not a byproduct of her continued candidacy — it is the goal. She, the consummate realist, must know that she has no practical shot at the nomination herself after her numbing loss in North Carolina and her paper-thin margin in Indiana. But she welcomes the opportunity an ongoing candidacy offers to bash Obama and to drive a wedge between him and the voters he must have to beat McCain.

When I first read this, my initial response was that Dick Morris was full of it and that his hatred of the Clintons really knew no bounds. But, in light of this (which happened after Morris wrote his column), now I wonder if he really does know what he's talking about. Scary thought.

--Jason Zengerle 

Posted: Thursday, May 08, 2008 12:07 PM with 18 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

tnmats said:

1980?  Shouldn't that be 1960?  The Republicans (Reagan) won in 1980.

May 8, 2008 12:33 PM

hellx said:

While I much prefer Obama to Clinton and never want to hear her voice again on the radio while I'm eating breakfast, I'm not really that bothered by her trying to drive a wedge between Obama and working-class white voters.  Is there any doubt that this is the exact same strategy that we can expect the Republicans to pursue in the general election?  It is much better for the Obama campaign to learn to deal with this issue now than in October.

Plus, since Obama is having so much "trouble" with working-class white voters now, it sets the stage one of the rebound stories that media loves when Obama wins the nomination and is no longer facing competition for the affections of the Democratic base.

May 8, 2008 12:34 PM

tnmats said:

Morris may be right, but if she rips the party apart with this kind of attack there are a lot of Dems that would never support her in 2012.

May 8, 2008 12:35 PM

ackyri said:

No, he's not making any sense.

"When Republicans tried to do so, in 1980 and 1992..."

Ah yes, 1980. The year Republicans went for a third term as popular Republican president Jimmy Carter was prohibited from running again.

May 8, 2008 12:36 PM

peter1943 said:

Citing Dick Morris on the Clintons is like citing Stephen Glass on The New Republic.

May 8, 2008 12:37 PM

gchernack said:

The GOP tried to last more than 12 years in 1980?  Really?  I must have missed something or Dick did because I believe that while the GOP was in the White House from 1969-77, the Democrats were from 1977-81.  And the Republicans won the 1980 election.  

May 8, 2008 12:38 PM

sprechs said:

come on, even if she is the self-interested monster that Morris consistently portrays, her own self-interest would preclude her from openly hurting obama's '08 chances.  If Obama loses, and the meme becomes that Hillary sabotaged him, she'll be doomed in a Democratic primary in 2012.  Her comments were very poorly put, but the underlying content (that Obama has done poorly among white working class voters) is not exactly something that has been under the surface of late...

May 8, 2008 12:38 PM

walthamolian said:

Wow, that's a pretty cynical take on Hillary.  But I suppose it's just possible.

On reflection, partisan Democrats might be convinced that it even makes long-term sense for their party:  McCain gets to inherit the messes of the Bush administration, deal with them as best he can, and then retire (exhausted) from the fray in 2012.  Up steps a fresh-faced Democrat who can take over the reins of power in a somewhat better situation, and lead the party back to glory.

The question is, could Hillary Clinton possibly be that fresh face?  The challenge for Obama would be to continue to grow in stature and return in '12 as a more seasoned candidate.  I'm not sure any politicians really take such a long view, however --

May 8, 2008 12:40 PM

gchernack said:

Just to add, his argument re a third term makes no sense.  The GOP succeeded in 1988 when Bush won.  Maybe he know more about HRC than history, but I doubt it.

May 8, 2008 12:43 PM

blackton said:

The Democratic party has never been one for second chances. No candidate has ever had a second successful run if they came up short the first time, except Al Gore who was VP in the interim. Hillary has lost blacks for good, her voting bloc of old whites will only get older, and other women will make serious runs in 2012 taking away a large chunk of her support as young women will say of Hillary "been there, done that, and she couldn't get it done then" And the money won't be there either, no one will want to get burned twice. She might be delusional enough to think she can get it done, but few others will. In 2012 it will be a White southern Democrat like Mark Warner, and a woman VP like Sebellius.

May 8, 2008 1:00 PM

Ghost in the Machine said:

You know, just when I thought Sen. Clinton realized she had been decisively beaten, and thus that it was time...

May 8, 2008 1:02 PM

lymon1 said:

Heck, I've written this long before Dick Morris -- give me his spot on Fox!  I don't think she's out to sabotage Obama's fall race rather than going balls-out (sorry) to win the primary, but she wouldn't mind if he loses.  

Even if Obama wins, there's no guarantee he'll be doing better in 2011 than Jimmy Carter was in 1979 -- Ted Kennedy had an excellent chance to beat Carter for the nomination and blew it (pop psychology -- I think he lost it on purpose, at least subconciously -- he had resisted the calls to run for years, finally took the plunge, then gave a jaw-droppingly bad interview with Roger Mudd and went downhill from there).  

So...watch for a great convention Hillary speech (Ted Kennedy's was one of the finest political speeches of my lifetime -- Mondale chucked his draft for the next night and copied Kennedy's), then make Obama chase the stage after her for a handshake!

May 8, 2008 1:03 PM

GSpinks said:

This should come as no surprise to anyone. Her appeal to white democrats has been one of her focal points in this primary; she has said it a dozen different ways, that she is the more electable candidate because she does way better among white voters overall.

The ineffable part of her argument is that, since she obviously has no "white" advantage against McCain, she is assuming the blacks and well educated who are flocking to Obama will do their part as responsible democrats and line up behind her as the nominee. The problem with this assumption is that the disaffected blacks will probably "stay home" in record numbers unless Obama can manage to quell their resentment, and the well-educated will decide for themselve on for whom to vote.

The ineffability is unfortunate, because when spoken out loud it really drives home the fallacy of her current game-plan. Then again, she has campaigned as an experienced fighter, not a thinker with good judgement and foresight; this may be due to some level of self-awareness more than political spin.

May 8, 2008 1:39 PM

fougasseu said:

Morris is too Clinton-centric. Everyone who was in their orbit seems to think the Democratic Party revolves around them. Morris and the Clintons should have learned, but failed to learn post-Iowa that a lot has changed since the Clintons left the White House.

There are many remarkable things about Barack Obama: His oratorical skills, his management skills, his ability to take a punch - a lot of punches - but the most amazing thing has been his ability to beat, again and again, the most talented/successful political partnership in modern politics.

After the nomination of Obama HRC will be off the national stage, forever. Obama is just the first of a wave of post-Boomer leaders. They'll be moving into governorships, they'll be our new mayors, and they'll all be watching and learning from Obama, not the Clintons.

Time for a Change.

May 8, 2008 1:41 PM

The Stump said:

Two quick, semi-related thoughts: 1.) On the "white Americans" comment, I 80-percent agree

May 8, 2008 1:57 PM

dannyc said:

Yes, he's making sense.

May 8, 2008 7:21 PM

liberal reformer said:

Lymonl: I remember the Mudd interview. RM asked EMK why he wanted to be president and Kennedy tripped all over himself and gave an incoherent answer. Peter1943: The Glass reference is priceless - the gold standard of unreliability

May 8, 2008 11:27 PM

psantillana said:

I think for her the next best thing to her winning is Obama losing. She and Bill cannot stand him. He is the anti-them.

May 9, 2008 1:49 AM