Robert Novak writes on the rumors flying around Washington that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has “scandalous information” about Sen. Barack Obama. Allegedly, the Clinton campaign is holding on to the information for now and won’t be releasing it.
It’s a classic Clintonian strategy—and it probably has to do with Hillary’s sagging poll numbers in Iowa. Instead of the story being about how Obama is catching up to Hillary in Iowa, now the story is about what sort of dirt she has on the Illinois senator. In fact, she may be bluffing, but it doesn’t matter politically. The story is already making the rounds, and in the chance there is some dirt to be dug up (and there always is), the oppo people from all the other campaigns are going to be combing Obama’s record in order to find it. If there is something, Hillary can sit on it and look above the fray and let another candidate like Edwards discover it independently and leak it. She gets the benefit of getting the damaging information out without the trouble of doing it herself. It’s the sort of Machiavellian politics that the Clintons just love to play.
As for Obama, it was a mistake for him to run in this cycle. He had plenty of time to build up a national name for himself, running either in 2012 or 2016. Instead, he got too ambitious, and now a man who has never once had to run in a competitive local race is plunging himself into national politics against a well-oiled and vicious political machine. By the end of all of this, Obama will end up being such damaged goods that it may keep him out of national politics for the rest of his career. He still has a chance to beat Hillary, but only a slim one, and even then she’ll end up destroying him in the process. Hillary feels entitled to be President, and if she can’t have it, she’ll make sure that no other Democrat does.
While the Clinton camp is naturally saying this is all a Republican dirty trick, it’s the sort of political maneuver she’s famous for. Hillary’s claws are coming out, and the more Obama threatens her ascendancy, the more likely she will be to use them.
“Robert Novak writes on the rumors flying around Washington that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign has “scandalous information†about Sen. Barack Obama.”
One has to wonder how much of this is more of Novak’s usual scandal-mongering, because if it’s simply another Clintonian dirty trick, that machine seems to be a little rustier than it was 10 years ago given the failure of her gender card-playing two weeks ago. This seems similarly ham-handed and less likely to work with the kind of cable news scrutiny this BS gets nowadays that it didn’t during the Gingrich era.
“As for Obama, it was a mistake for him to run in this cycle. He had plenty of time to build up a national name for himself, running either in 2012 or 2016. Instead, he got too ambitious, and now a man who has never once had to run in a competitive local race is plunging himself into national politics against a well-oiled and vicious political machine. By the end of all of this, Obama will end up being such damaged goods that it may keep him out of national politics for the rest of his career.”
Wrong. This was the perfect climate for a “fresh face” and “change candidate” like Obama, credibly marketing a new approach that stands in contrast both to the hyperpartisan incumbent and the hyperpartisan frontrunner from his own party. Particularly if Hillary was to win in 2008, as is widely speculated to be likely even though I disagree, Obama would simply be eight years older eight years from now and have zero chance of being a second-term U.S. Senator in his 50s portraying himself as an agent of change after two terms of his party’s incumbency would be a flop. For better or worse, Barack Obama’s time is now.
“Hillary feels entitled to be President, and if she can’t have it, she’ll make sure that no other Democrat does.”
Whoa! Who’s wearing the tinfoil hat now? What exactly will Clinton do to destroy Obama if he gets the nomination in her place?