Down But Not Out?

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:21 AM

Hillary Rodham Clinton's best bet right now is for everyone to conclude that she's a loser.

Stay with me a minute. I haven't totally lost it.

For close to two years, the presidential race has been all about her. She was the front-runner, she was inevitable, she was, above all, a Clinton. Barack Obama was a newcomer, a phenomenon, a rock star, an Oprah-certified inspirational force, but Hillary was the virtual incumbent. The Republicans kept running against her.

When Obama won Iowa, the story was, Hillary loses. When Obama lost New Hampshire, the story was, Hillary's comeback. The plot line has always been whether the Hill and Bill and their unstoppable machine could be denied.

The result was a much harsher level of press scrutiny than anything aimed at Obama--plus all the first-women stuff about her cleavage, her cackle, her wrinkles, her teary moment and, always, her marriage. She has been the focus, some might say the obsessive focus, of the media culture.

But now that Obama has won Louisiana-Nebraska-Washington-Maine-Maryland-Virginia-D.C., the tide is turning. We are at the OMG moment--OMG, he might be president! The television chatter yesterday was all about how Obama matches up against John McCain. For the first time in a Hillary-centric universe, he is becoming the story. One can almost imagine a newsmagazine editor writing the cover line, "Is America Ready for a Black President?"

But race is the least of it. As the pendulum swings, these questions will be seriously weighed for the first time: What would an Obama administration look like? Is he a conventional liberal? Can he deliver on his lofty promises? Can a guy who was a state lawmaker in Springfield, Ill., three years ago really be the next commander in chief?

If the media get serious about posing such questions, Obama will be measured as all front-runners ultimately are, and not just as a Hillary-slayer. And if doubts develop, Clinton would be there as an alternative who is still close in the overall delegate count. In other words, people will be forced to contemplate whether they really want Hillary to lose.

Of course, the former first lady won't be sitting still during this period. She has run a cautious campaign until now. How many more times do we have to hear about "35 years" and "Day One"? She needs to change the dynamic, even as the harsh spotlight settles more firmly on her opponent.

"A day after she lost her status as front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination," says the L.A. Times, "Hillary Rodham Clinton stepped up her attacks on Sen. Barack Obama, challenging her opponent to debate."

Uh, great, but haven't there already been 612 debates? Obama hasn't exactly been ducking.

The New York Times does the math: "Senator Barack Obama emerged from Tuesday's primaries leading Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton by more than 100 delegates, a small but significant advantage that Democrats said would be difficult for Mrs. Clinton to make up in the remaining contests in the presidential nomination battle."

The New York Post goes with the opponent's spin:

"Hillary Rodham Clinton can no longer win the Democratic nomination, Barack Obama's campaign said yesterday.

"Obama campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters the 'only way' Clinton can overcome Obama's lead in pledged delegates after her latest lopsided defeats 'is to win most of the remaining contests in blowout form.'

"That's a highly unlikely scenario that no political expert expects."

And as we know, the political experts have been right about everything this year.

At Salon, Walter Shapiro asks the bookie question:

"Tuesday night's results will launch a Talmudic discussion among pundits about whether Obama should be crowned the party's front-runner or merely considered to be ahead by a nose as the protracted race enters the far turn. But the easiest measure is the barroom test: See if you can find a single person (other than maybe someone back from an off-the-grid trek in Nepal) who would take a bet on Hillary Clinton at even money."

Dick Polman goes with the iceberg metaphor:

"Picture the Titanic in mid-crisis, just as the second-class cabins are starting to flood. That's how the Hillary Clinton campaign looks . . .

"For Hillary, perhaps the worst indignity Tuesday night was John McCain's decision to ignore her and focus on Obama."

At the Weekly Standard, Richelieu says the corner has been turned:

"It'll never be the same again for the Hillary Clinton campaign. She is unlikely to recover. Everything has a tipping point, and in the Democratic race for president the ten day sweep that Barack Obama started on Saturday and is very likely to finish next Tuesday in Wisconsin is the final body blow the Clinton campaign will not recover from. . . .

"Although it will take days and weeks to show, the unsinkable Hillary for President operation has succumbed to an iceberg of titanic dimensions."

Joe Sudbay at Americablog says there's no arguing with success: "It looks like Democrats are coalescing around their new front runner. Let's keep this in perspective. Just a couple months ago, no one was predicting this outcome. Barack Obama went up against the Clinton machine, and their aura of invincibility. Yet, he keeps winning. Wait, not just winning. He is dominating the races."

At Portfolio, Matt Cooper (who's married to Hillary adviser Mandy Grunwald) offers change-the-subject advice:

"Clinton needs to completely reframe the race at this point. Experience didn't work as an argument. Ready on Day One? Who cares? She needs an issue that can galvanize her support but given the small policy differences with Obama, she doesn't have much to work with. I don't know why the campaign hasn't done more with Obama's saying that he was open lifting the taxable income cap on Social Security above its current $97,000. That's a huge tax increase for people who don't think they're rich. It's a place to start."

How does the Hillary camp keep discounting Barack's victories? That's what Ari Berman wants to know, in the Nation:

"The Clinton campaign has been busy inventing new reasons for why Barack Obama keeps winning state after state . . .

"Either the state has a caucus, or too many black people, or too many affluent people, or too many independent voters, or too many red staters. If only the Clintons had the perfect electoral map.

"If only.

"If only the Clintons had a coherent explanation for why Obama has so thoroughly out-organized and out-hussled them across the country in February. After all, there was no reason why Hillary Clinton, after spending eight years in the White House and amassing a hefty war chest of money and incumbency in the Senate, couldn't of won caucus states, or red states, or states with large African-American communities. The front-runner is supposed to win these places. If Obama had lost eight states in a row, his candidacy would most certainly of been toast."

Here, from the New Republic's Michael Crowley, is an example of what I was talking about as far as Obama being allowed to skate:

"The press's failure to closely examine Obama's Iraq record is a source of perpetual frustration for the Clinton camp--and a fair gripe. It has allowed Obama's supporters to mythologize him as a fearless crusader. At the same time, it has enabled the Clintons to mount overzealous attacks on his record.

"Many of the Clintons' specific attacks on Obama are unfair distortions. But it's also true that a close look at his Iraq record reveals more nuance than the Obama campaign acknowledges. It shows that Obama is cautious and pragmatic, hardly immune from political pressures, and sometimes prone to shading his rhetoric for convenience. But, ultimately, in substantive policy terms, he is also open to intellectual reexamination based on changing events. This may not be quite the Obama of the popular imagination, and it is certainly not the Obama of his own campaign ads. Nor is it, after 2002, substantially different from Hillary Clinton's own course on Iraq. But it is no 'fairy tale,' either."

To coin a phrase.

Here's another example, from the conservative side. How many stories even took note of Obama's vote on a Bush-backed bill to expand the government's surveillance powers?

"As good of a campaign as Obama has run," says Bull Dog Pundit, "you do wonder if he's really given any thought to the fact that he actually might become the president. How else to explain his 'No' vote on a bill that was overwhelmingly supported 67-31.

"I understand he's trying to mollify his far-left base on this, but if he does actually think the bill went to far then you should be very concerned about his ability to keep this country safe."

One commentator isn't writing off Hillary Clinton:

"No matter who wins, Hillary is going to be the nominee," says Rush Limbaugh. "Meaning: Obama could win it, but the Clintons are going to find a way to get this. It goes back to what I said yesterday. They want this. They need this more than anything in their lives! They have been planning on it, getting back to the White House. This is the Baby Boomers' last chance; the left-wing, anti-war Baby Boomers' last chance to get their arms around this country and bend it, shape it, as they want it."

Rush adds: "One of the real reasons that people aren't going to attack Obama is because he's black and nobody wants to be accused of being racist. He's going to have a free ride, and it's why Mrs. Clinton is playing kid gloves here."

But the good news for the Dems is unmistakable, says USA Today:

"The Commonwealth of Virginia hasn't gone Democratic in a presidential election since 1964. Yet when the returns were counted in the state's primary Tuesday night Democratic hopeful Barack Obama drew more votes by himself than the Republican field did combined.

"Call it the enthusiasm gap: In everything from voter turnout to campaign fundraising, Republicans are lagging in ways that could mean trouble in November."

Michelle Obama is raising her profile, with interviews on "GMA" and Larry King, and man, is she poised:

"Outspoken, strong-willed, funny, gutsy and sometimes sarcastic, Michelle Obama is playing a pivotal role in her husband's campaign as it builds on a series of successes, including a sweep on Tuesday of contests in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.

"Her personal style -- forthright, comfortable in the trenches, and often more blunt than Mr. Obama -- plays well with a broad swath of the electorate and has given the campaign a steelier edge while allowing Mr. Obama to stay largely above it all."

How does the GOP's Mr. Presumptive deal with the Obama wave? "Expect to hear McCain repeatedly dismiss Obama's platitudes on 'hope' and get him into a debate on specific policies" says Captain Ed. "Obama will lose that fight, but if he doesn't engage McCain, he'll look like an empty suit. McCain has a lot more time to focus on Obama than the reverse, and he can do some damage to Obama's momentum among independents while Obama tries to finish off Hillary Clinton."

Mark McKinnon, the Bush media adviser who has helped shape McCain's message, is dropping out because . . . he doesn't want to criticize Obama!

McCain to bloggers: "Listen, I'll never forget you. You were the only guys who would listen to me for a couple of months. Do you think I'd ever forget you?"

What about Mike Huckabee, who was shut out in the Potomac primaries? National Review's Byron York has the dope:

"Inside the Huckabee camp these days, there is a distinct sense of pragmatism about the campaign's prospects. The time is coming -- probably just after the March 4 primary in Texas -- when Huckabee, if he cannot produce any more victories, will leave the Republican presidential race . . .

"Huckabee can afford to keep going, he thinks he can do well in Texas, and that, as the sole recipient of votes from conservatives unhappy with McCain, his support has actually increased . . .

"Whenever he goes, Huckabee will leave with a stature far higher than when he began the race. He is now a national figure in GOP politics, widely admired as the best natural campaigner in the 2008 field. Good, and perhaps even greater, things await. And it is unlikely that Huckabee wants to do anything in the last days of his campaign to diminish all the gains he has made."

As he himself says, what else has he got to do?

Actually, this: Give a paid speech in the Cayman Islands this weekend. No delegates there, I think.

Finally, I serve up everything you ever wanted to know about Chris Matthews and his approach to politics.