Hillary’s “checkers” speech
The majority of today’s voters don’t remember how Richard Nixon trumped the American political psyche by crying and invoking the image of his pet doggie “Checkers” during a speech dissociating himself from a “slush fund” scandal. Wittingly or unwittingly, Hillary copped a page from the Dickster, gaining voter sympathy by crying or “almost crying” during her New Hampshire coffee klatch. The “comeback kid’s” margin of victory of 3 percent, fueled in part by sympatico female voters, however, is less than the margin of error in “scientific polls” (which is a generally accepted 5 percent). Is it politically incorrect to inquire whether Mrs Clingon’s “welling up” was scripted… since she helped prosecute Mr Nixon, her best response, if aksed, would merit a “non-denial denial.” Crying only works once though. Anybody seen Anthony Lake, Mike Espy, Zoe Baird, Ira Magaziner, Webb Hubbell or Lani Guinier lately?
Posted: January 9th, 2008 under Ain't That America, Do The Right Thing, Edwards, Hillary, Obama, The Primary Season, VOTE!, We Are the Enemy, Where's the Outrage.
Comments: 7
Comments
Comment from Sasha
Time: January 9, 2008, 5:06 am
Anybody who is callow enough to not know the “Checkers” speech should check out the YouTube version. (Dog I love the internets.)
And of course it was scripted. She almost exactly copied the words that Edwards used about it being personal from the Saturday night debates. And after two sentences she hopped back on message like a flea on a mangy dog. No question whatsoever in my mind. However I likeed it. I got a glimpse of what Bill has had to listen to all these years and had an atypical moment of pity for the poor man.
Yeah, I’m the feminist. Your point?
Comment from bdr
Time: January 9, 2008, 7:24 am
A politician gave a scripted speech?
That bitch. That BITCH.
Comment from Anonymous
Time: January 9, 2008, 7:53 am
For the poll cynics in the group, they ALL missed this one because the “cry” effect came to late to be measured. I don’t think it was a “cry”, but I feel it was scripted. How else to explain her plea: “I just don’t want to see us fall backwards.” Take that you backwards Barack.
So we now know two things for sure: 1) older Democratic women will vote for Hillary over Barack; 2) Independents will vote for Barack over Hillary. Now if we can just get the Independents to stay home next November, Hillary can win.
Comment from timr
Time: January 9, 2008, 9:52 am
what on earth is all this hatred towards Clinton? I expect it from repigs, in fact I get a wing nut magazine that predicts the total downfall of the US if Clinton is elected, but to hear this kind of animosity from dems is kind of weird. I read TPM earlier, and the comments there range from HRC-good to HRC-totally destroys america. I’m sorry, but I just don’t get it. I know that the MSM and the so called lib pundits-dowd, matthews- have the knives out and are more than willing to stab her in the back, but why? I think that Jon Stewart had it right last nite about the “crying” moment. And I wonder what she has done to make so many dems think that she is so calculating and that she has no emotion.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: January 9, 2008, 10:10 am
The anonymous comment above is mine: I used another computer and did not the name when I made the comment.
Timr, I’d say that hatred against Clinton is from the Republicans, and it is a tit for tat on Democratic hatred for Bush. Let’s remember this is all part of the flip side of Slick Willie’s legacy. If Clinton gets the nomination, we will have four more years of hatred for the president. I don’t see this “hatred” against her among Democrats–other words come to mind such as seeing her as marginal, manipulative, exaggerator-in-chief-in-waiting, imperial, and so on.
And while the argument goes that she is the most vetted, she does bring all of this down on herself. In fact, I think she thrives on it and needs it to help define her. Without this “hatred” she would not have had her moment on Monday and she would not have won New Hampshire. We’ll see how far the sympathy vote can carry her.
Comment from Groom Lake
Time: January 9, 2008, 11:31 am
Sasha, my post has nothing to do with feminism or inciting feminists. Mrs Clingon is in no way an “entitlement” candidate on behalf of females, but it appears that female votes helped put her “over the top” more than other groups. And, mind you, this victory is less than the “margin of error” in scientific polls. As for Obama, New Hampshire has a lot of voters who are ex-Massachusetts middle and upper middle class racists who carpetbagged into the “live free or die” state to get away from Blue Hill Avenue, Southie Projects,Washington Street… so yeah, don’t rule out racism as a factor. Then too, the wives of Pat, Tony, Ray and Stash probably aren’t too comfortable, and are a lot scared by Michele Obama’s “first lady in waiting” behavior. As for media piling on Hilla, I don’t buy it. The pollsters ask lots of different questions and do push polling to manipulate voter sentiment. The NH race had “tightened” when Barack won Iowa caucus. How they got the swing to “plus fifteen for Obama” by election day, who knows… For me the story is how the “scientific pollsters” fucked up, and how the MSM pimped the polls. Each of the Dem candidates occupies their own station of the cross. When they get further up the mountain, it won’t matter. McCain-Rice will make doubters of those who play the race card pretty fast. And that can happen, trust me…
Comment from Sasha
Time: January 9, 2008, 12:00 pm
I know Groom. My “feminist” remark was to head off folks who wanted to tell me I was a mean guy who didn’t understand a woman’s feelings. And “anonymous” I totally disagree with your stated reason for the flawed polls and with what we know for sure. I believe that the polls were wrong because of the polls. That is to say the uncommitted voters that may have otherwise voted for Senator Obama though it unnecessary because of the landslide predictions and chose Senator McCain instead.
As for older Democratic women, there is no single pattern. Please don’t make the mistake of trying to generalize from the New Hampshire result. Something that folks don’t seem to be taking into account is that Senator Obama had the best ‘machine’ in Iowa while Senator Clinton had the best ‘machine’ in New Hampshire. Getting your folks out still counts for a lot. (And then there is that “it was a warm day so the old people went out” factor on both sides of the aisle.)
Write a comment