Where's Hillary?
With all of the focus on the turf wars in DC, we've noticed one of the looming figures of recent history notably absent. We ask, where's Hillary?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been trotting the globe. She has handed out aid in Haiti and satellite phones in Chile. She's spent time dressing down the leaders of Israel, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. She's been diplomatically smooching with the leaders of Russia. She has gone hat in hand to China looking for more pin money to finance the shiny trinkets that the Obama Administration wants to pass out. She has been vocal abroad on women's rights, fair trade practices, and international cooperation. In DC, the silence of her views is deafening.
She has been visibly absent from high profile events from the State of the Union speech to the recent START agreement on nuclear arms with Russia announced last week. She has been ambivalent or silent on Obama Administration initiatives of international importance. While not publicly disputing policies set forth by the administration, she has not provided the sort of vocal support that is normally expected of a Secretary of State in advancing the goals of the President. We think of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, James Baker, George Schultz.(really everyone we can think of since George Marshall served under Harry Truman). The primary role of the modern Secretary of State is to provide the bully pulpit and the diplomatic arm-twisting for the President on the world stage. Hillary has been notably quiet. Hubby Bill has been drawing more press than our official ambassador to the world.
We find it odd that Secretary Clinton does not seem to hold the same sway with the President that SecDef Robert Gates, AG Eric Holder, SecTreas Tim Geithner, or even Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano do. We also find it odd that during the great debate on healthcare reform, which was Hillary's signature issue, not a word was issued in support.
We first took note of this back in October of last year when the Secretary went of a visit to meet with the Russian leadership. During a press conference with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, Clinton made a point of praising the Russian leader for his ability to "work with those who have differing views" and to bring about consensus. We thought these comments reflected a stark contrast to the domestic political situation of President Obama, who was already mired in a partisan slugfest on several fronts, most notably healthcare.
There could be many reasons for the low profile being projected by Secretary Clinton. The one we would hope for is that she is deeply engaged in her job and doing her best to advance the interests of the United states abroad. Sometimes shining a light on these workings is counter-productive, as it tips our hand to those we are attempting to bring about to our way of thinking. Hillary earned a reputation as a Senator for being a hard worker and mastering the skills needed to accomplish her goals. Still, this is not borne out by her seeming orbit near the outside of the administration. It reminds one of Colin Powell's situation after his fateful speech on Iraq's possession of WMDs to the United Nations.
Until the successes that the Obama administration has managed to snatch from the jaws of defeat over the past two weeks, there could be a strong argument made for keeping Hillary at arm's length. Simply, the President did not want the public's sense of buyer's remorse (especially among independent voters), to be reminded of who they could have had instead. The point was occasionally kicked around the talking head circuit that if Hillary were President, rather than Obama, maybe there would be some stuff getting done. It echoed of John McCain’s argument that experience counts (until he embraced his inner maverick as an agent of change). The editorial staff at TPP has speculated on this as well, though no consensus has been reached.
There is an argument that can be made in favor of Secretary Clinton’s demeanor being well played strategy. There is widespread recognition of the Clinton’s as master politicians. Few will deny that Bill Clinton is one of the shrewdest campaigners and political strategists to ever serve as President. His wife has benefit of his advice, and is in her own right a formidable candidate. She has an air of gravitas that President Obama has yet to develop. It would not be a long reach to come to the conclusion that Hillary may challenge a weakened Obama in 2012, in the same way that Ted Kennedy challenged Jimmy Carter in 1980.
A recap of the facts. Hillary was the presumed Presidential nominee for the Democratic party in 2008 until her candidacy was upended by Barack Obama. Hillary demanded a floor vote at the Democratic convention to underline her legitimacy as a power in the party. She stressed in her campaign her strong background in domestic issues. As Secretary of State for Obama she can burnish her foreign policy credentials, and quietly build relationships with other world leaders (many of whom see President Obama as inept or naïve). By being in the a member of the Administration, she is able to claim the President’s confidence. By doing her job quietly she avoids the appearance of disloyalty. By not being a front row cheerleader, she creates credible distance between her views and those of the President, should she opt to later vocally disagree.
It wouldn’t be unthinkable for the following events to play out. After the mid-term elections, especially should the Democrats get beaten down, Hillary decides to return to private life and retire. She does the Bill lecture circuit outlining her ideas and her suggestions as a private citizen to the President.. She continues to build a reputation as a pragmatist interested in solutions, not ideology. Should the economy remain weak, or get worse, and should President Obama become further weakened through Republican opposition or a series of policy failures, an opportunity is created for Hillary to step in and rescue the Democratic Party. She can claim, and probably rightly for this scenario, public demand that she challenge Obama for the good of the nation. It is essentially the Kennedy plan of 1980. The only reason Senator Kennedy lost is that he underestimated his opponent. Hillary has already made that mistake and will not repeat it.
Common Sense Dictates
Of course this is pure speculation. We have taken a random convergence of isolated facts and spun them together into an interesting drama. The common sense is not in diagnosing a Machiavellian scheme in the West Wing. We are not the first organization to posit this scenario. The common sense lies in reading the tea leaves of the public perception when this idea is presented to someone who had not heard it before. Overwhelmingly among voters who call themselves independent, the idea creates a buzz of excitement. Among Democrats the idea is met with interest. Among Republicans a Hillary candidacy seems to generate more concern than President Obama running for a second term.
This reflects underlying symptoms in the American political mindset. The far left is disappointed in President Obama to date. The Independents in the middle are upset at what they see as an Obama bait-and-switch – the soothing bipartisan candidate pushing an agenda once elected that is to the left of what most of them are comfortable with. The Right recognizes that it still has not asserted a positive message or plan, and does not have a discernable leader in place to challenge President Obama.
The American public is looking for a leader that it wants to follow and sees none. It wants the business of the nation dealt with in a manner that makes sense at the family dinner table. It is tired of flailing from crisis to crisis, and looks to our representatives in DC to act as professionals and adults, not whining, screaming, petulant children. Secretary Clinton, in her current incarnation, looks like one of the few professionals among amateurs. It is telling that the Democrats and Independents are entertaining alternatives to President Obama. It is even more telling that the Republicans realize this but have not positioned themselves better. The mid-term elections will be the rehearsal for what we see in 2012. Common sense dictates that candidates from either party understand the mind and mood of America. Then, once elected, they will need to conduct the people’s business in a manner that the people will support. You know, Common Sense.
RLB
Categories: Partisan Politics
Tags: political leadership
In my opinion, you hit the nail right on the head.
Reply to this
Talk about a back-handed compliment. Hillary looks good compared to Obama because Obama is such a disaster? That's not how it looks from here. How it looks from my point of view is that Hillary is doing her job as she should. She looks competent because she doesn't have a bunch of Republicans trying to trip her up left and right. It's easier to be Secretary of State than President. At this point I bet she's glad that she didn't win.
Reply to this
That was an entertaining way to focus on the mindset of the voters. I've heard the Hillary thing before, and you've got it right. Hillary is looking good to a lot of Obama voters now.Obama should be taking notes and doing one of Bill's triangulations if he has a hope at term 2. The sum up of voter attitude is key. For a bunch of different reasons no one is happy. Mostly it's because people feel that the government is not listening. It's probably why the volume keeps going up. Well, they might not be listening now, but they will hear us loud and clear in November. The group that is elected then better carry out the will of the people or we'll bounce them out in 2012 as well.
Reply to this
I was always a Hillary supporter, and I still believe that she is better qualified than Obama. Still, it's only a little over a year since he took office and it's awfully early to be looking to 2012. Reagan had about the same poll numbers this far into his first term. I do agree that Obama has suceeded in upsetting just about everyone. Sometimes that's what leadership is about. If America is that upset, he will be handed a Republican congress in November, and that will be something that he will have to deal with. Bill Clinton made it work, I don't see why Obama wouldn't.
Reply to this
Hillary wants to run against Obama? Bring it on. There;s nothing like a bruising primary taking on a sitting President to open things up for the other side. Just ask Jerry Ford and Jimmy Carter. I don't think she'll do it, but if she does, I send her a check just to cause mischief.
Reply to this
This would be funny if it weren't so close to the truth. I wouldn't put it past her. I don't think that the Republicans need to worry about her though, just like the Democrats don't need to worry about the next Bush trying to get the White House. Americans don't like dynasties (except for those Kennedys). My guess is that Obama runs again, and we send up a yet to be named player who knocks one out of the park. It would be nice if we actually did something with our next win.
Reply to this
Where's Hillary? Just saw her fly past my office on her broom. Having her challenge Obama would be like watching the ultimate train wreck. We still need to counter either of them with a real candidate. No McCains, no Romneys, and even though Sarah is a cutie, she's not Presidential material. Time to see who we can bring up from the farm team.
Reply to this
I'll drink to THAT one, Madhatr!
Reply to this
Rick Perry is doing a good job for Texas. About the lowest unemployment in the country,no deficits, good educational system and hard work is still rewarded. I think he'd be a fine President.
Reply to this
Oh come on, not another Texan! Of course it would be interesting to see if Texas could come up with a candidate who could speak in actual sentences and not mash words up.
Reply to this
Like maybe LBJ?
Reply to this
Ok, so I'm gonna guess you guys are joking and realize that it doesn't work that way. Where the next President comes from is determined by who is still standing at the end of the campaign. If we wind up with another Texan, it's because that's who got the most votes. Where a guy is from doesn't matter. Lincoln was from Illinois. Obama doesn't appear to be a Lincoln.
Reply to this
Nice civics lesson from the Brit. Hey, I wouldn't mind Perry. It's a better choice than Pawlenty. I agree that Romney's time has passed, and this is going to have to come out of a fresh crop of candidates. I think I'll actually be looking for executive experience (a governor seems the best type of candidate). Obama let everything get out of hand because he thinks like a legislator, and you just can't run a country by committee. It's a different mindset. I don't think that some business billionaire is the answer either. You've got to know how to work the machine. No more amateurs. We need leadership. I sort of like Gen. Petraeus. He put Iraq on the best foot possible, and is correcting Afghanistan. Maybe he could do the same here.
Reply to this
So do all you guys have is candidates who's name starts with P? It's way to early to count Obama out, and Hillary would ruin her carefully crafted reputation in challenging him. But put up your best GOPPER, we'll be ready.
Reply to this
I still like Romney - he's the best all around. He's been a governor, a businessman, and he straightened out the IOC for the Salt Lake City games. He understands the economy, and he gets things done. On top of that, his name does't start with P.
Reply to this
Romney saddled Massachusetts with Obamacare lite and now it's running the state into the ground. Wild cost over runs. Just like we'll be getting from real Obamacare. No way I can go with him.
Reply to this
Marco Rubio from Florida is solid and giving Crist a hell of a run.
Reply to this
When he gets some experience, I'll be in. Fresh young faces are just dangerously naive, regardless of party affiliation. I would'nt have voted for either, but I have to believe Hillary would be doing a better job than Obama at this point.
Reply to this
There's other challengers lining up on the Democratic side. Hillary has the best shot at taking Obama down, but Evan Bayh quit because he didn't want to damage his reputation any worse by having to back Obama's agenda in the Senate. You can't be re-elected by voting against the will of the people.
Reply to this
John Boehner would be a solid candidate, and he pretty much is in charge of the Republicans now. I could vote for him
Reply to this
Where's Hillary? As far away from Bill as possible!!!!!!!
Reply to this
He still gets better headlines too!
Reply to this
I could see Petraeus. Is he Republican?
Reply to this
Military goes that way. Eisenhower never declared until the Republicans asked him to run. Powell was an assumed Republican, but came out for Obama.Maybe it's just pragmatic, you become what it takes to win.
Reply to this
Obama can permanently sideline Hillary by putting her on the Supreme Court in Stevens place. That kills two birds with one stone. She's out of politicas and it's a big thumb in her husband's eye. Bubba said in an interview prior to leaving office that he would like to be appointed to the Supreme Court. Sounds like a fun solution right up Obama's alley.
Reply to this
The Southern Republican Leadership Conference is this week in New Orleans. Most of the potential candidates are showing up. One guy who got a rock star reception was JC Watts. He's a retired congressman and currently a minister, a true conservative, a brilliant mind, and he's black. I'd be happy to cast a vote for him to be our next President.
Reply to this
J. C. Watts? I thought he stayed away from politics since retirement. He really would be a good candidate, but he'll have to start early. Not too many people outside of Texas and Oklahoma are going to know a lot about him
Reply to this
Sarah gave a goos speech at SRLC - zinged Obama back on the nuclear arms agreement. It's a shame she can't get taken seriously outside of the core base. She lights the crowd on fire. If Hillary decides to run, she'll just be burning down the house.
Reply to this
That's funny - Orrin Hatch pulled out the Hillary idea this morning, and it caused a big ruckus for Gibbs in the press room. Hillary issued a sort of denial. She said that she's happy in her job, not looking for another one. No speculation on what she would do if it was offered to her... funny stuff.
Reply to this
I saw that too. It's always good to turn out to be ahead of the curve, even on the speculation. It makes it easier to spot the real trends.
Reply to this
According to some people I know at State, Hillary isn't planning on going anywhere anytime soon. No Supreme Court for sure. With Obama on a winning streak lately she might finish up as Secretary of State and the just retire.
Reply to this
Nice to be right. Elena Kagan is no Hillary. She's actually the best possible choice - a Constitutional conservative who will seek to directly apply the Constitution in her decisions. She will not create law out of thin air.
Reply to this
They were talking about this on Hannity today with Dick Morris (who should know - he was Bill Clinton's Karl Rove). He thinks that if the election goes to the Republicans, and Obama is further weakened, the Dems will be up for a change in leadership. He sees not the Carter Kennedy thing, but RFK forcing Johnson to not run. It makes sense.
Reply to this
Hillary and Bill both owe Obama a huge debt. They both look so much better than him by comparison.
Reply to this