Why is Hillary Crashing?

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2008/01/why-is-hillary.html


In "She's No Lady: Politics, Family and International Feminism" by Arvonne Fraser, Nodin Press, 2007. There is a part of it I believe may help us understand how and why the plus 100 million Hillary Clinton Campaign is on the verge of Crash and Burn. Garrison Keillor wrote the introduction, and has done a couple of hour long interviews with Arvonne on Public Radio as part of the "virtual book tour." ...So who is the Author of this political biography?... Post College, she went to work as the Office Manager for Hubert Humphrey's Senate Campaign in 1948, from there to Office Manager of the DFL... she mastered the art of campaign management, eventually getting Freeman elected Governor, helped elect Gene McCarthy, Organized JFK's 1960 Campaign, and got her Husband elected first to the State Senate, and in 1962, to the House of Rep. Moved to DC, she took over managing the office on the Hill, but quickly got interested in the emerging Feminist Movement, and after organizing Hill Staffers, she moved on to help birth NOW, the National and Minnesota Womens' Political Caucus, the Women's Equity Action League, and many other key feminist groups. In 1977, Carter appointed her Assistant Secretary of State for Women's Affairs. In between she wrote the language for Title IX, and got it through Congress. When Reagan eliminated the position in State in 1981, she brought many of the programs back to Minnesota, put them into the Humphrey Institute where she was appointed, raised the money to run them over the next 12 years.

In 1993, after Clinton's election, considerable lobbying went into getting the new administration to appoint her as the US Delegate to the UN Commission on the Status of Women -- and she was appointed. But after about three years, Hillary had Arvonne fired just before the Beijing UN Conference. According to Arvonne, Hillary did not want to bother with all the linked up Feminist Organizations that had carried this effort over the bad years of Reagan and Bush I, and thus decided Arvonne had to leave. She did. Arvonne did not exactly appreciate the fact that Hillary had one of Arvonne's best friends do the honors, and in addition have other Clinton people in State see too it that the US lost its seat on the UN Commission by not attending the meeting where nominations were done...


Because Garrison Keillor has done two hour long interviews with Arvonne on local Public Radio -- and because he asked questions about Hillary essentially ordering Arvonne eliminated from the State Department, this has become an undercurrent in the local DFL circles, and I am led to understand that across the country there are similar stories being told that do not serve the Clinton Presidential Campaign well. All the older Feminists who were in on the action in the late 60's and through the 70's know all about this sort of thing, and while many of them would love to see a woman elected President, they are not sure about this candidate, and they have withheld support. I think Arvonne's book and her story are at the root of it all. When leadership knows you had a hand in firing the woman who probably founded more specialized feminist organizations than anyone else -- you have cards to show before you get an endorsement. My guess is that the tale Arvonne tells has counterparts all over the country, and once the first little break occured in the dike around the Clinton Machine, the instinct was to walk away, to not engage with saving something for Hillary. Afterall, she fired Arvonne Fraser.

I have many more examples that fit in with this story -- the decision the Clinton's made to oppose Howard Dean's election to chair the DNC back in 2005, the efforts they made to stop in its tracks the 50 State Program that Dean helped plan, and has carefully executed. All that stuff coming out of Rahm Emanual in 2006 about Dean sending the DNC money to state party organizations, and not to Rahm's committee -- all that was about who owns the party, and who decides what outside movements are part of the party process and thus influence it. But right now I think the fact that Arvonne is telling her story, on radio that carries into South Dakota, Iowa, Wisconsin and of course all of Minnesota has been somewhat influential. I suspect across the country, there are other very similar stories, and taken together they are the back story to the crash of the 100 million dollar campaign.

even $110,000,000 can't solve problems at the top

but as we know if you have GOOD tactics and GOOD planning you can still elect a bad product.
What I don't understand is why the DLC continues tactics that simply aren't working.

the GOP is a piece of cake. They are naturally corrupt, at least the yahoos in office these days. (Sigh, I remember fondly John Anderson, Chuck Percy and other brilliant, honest, and patriotic American pols from the GOP)

As with any ego-driven organization, some dems are easily tempted by bucks and power. Case in point, Rahn Emanuel, Nancy Pelosi. The DLC will exist so long as we let them in the door.

it had nothing to do with us. The DLC was not elected by anyone but other dem pols.

since the primaries became the main way of choosing a candidate, only one person bush, has won the Iowa and NH primaries and went on to win the presidency and we all know why.

So - right now what's the big deal. Hillary hasn't lost the 48 remaining states. And she won't. But of course the MSM and their hate and vile are sure as hell trying to knock her down. But they won't.

I wonder what would happen if the MSM and the republicans and the real Democratic members of their party started spewing the hate and vile at Obama that they are spewing at Hillary.

This is information I didn't know, thank you for posting. I also think that many people just don't like the idea of a dynasty in politics. We had that with the Bushes and we've seen the tragic results. Also I think you have to give Obama some of the credit for presenting a message that captures a lot of people.

I, nor most voters didn't know much about that. The entire public picture is harmonic with that however. Her main base is presumptive among women who DON'T know that side of her very much. You can't hide really who you are, but you CAN win simple-minded elections. Dems are usually not that simple-minded and things that surprise you, facts, instincts, filter down from on top.

I noted both sides of that when I told everyone she was probably foredoomed for all the reasons being interconnected. She is trapped inside the Gordian Knot she herself has added string too, with Bill, with GOP strategists, with the real intent of corporate backers. I suppose the South could have won the Civil War too. In that analogy the logic of resources, time and simple commitment would seem to support the tempting road to the presidency that seduces a lot goofier DOA's. But she has had many fundamental things entirely all wrong. In the GOP thug universe you can go so far playing their game, but in the end you have to be completely satanic to win out, when even their powerful crash and burn like Al Capone. Without knowing these details it was obvious she was locked into not really earrning or risking
setting on fire the women's movement. She preferred a wider more tepid, less "divisive" base. The article shows she had sealed herself into the Third Way cocoon(that can never ever hatch) drastically and long ago. My continuing worry is that Obama can go all the way and then win himself, while president, into that same deadly covering. I am sure the Black leadership has been trying to communicate the same concerns with the result they have really no vital influence to in themselves sink their own rising star.

I have to ask though, does the left, all these leaders of progressive causes fare any better, get any public awareness more than patriotic CIA officers bucking the abuse of power? The effect is dangerously minimal. The suggestion that they can take credit for Hillary's coming up short is not all that convincing. The main thing that did her in from automatically rolling on a sea of half-awareness and distracted(from the real crisis) enthusiasm was simply Barack and Edwards outshining her weighted down baggage with a counter-punch of heart and rhetoric. The press was ambivalent and weighed down too trying to madly tear her down per custom and raise her up as nominee- to knock her down for the GOP. Sheer energy and charisma of old-fashioned Dem pol quality has simply punctured the seal on this quantum madness. Within that seal, yes the disgruntled, wary feminists lurked, probably to grumble after some final debacle after the fall that "we could have told you so." If they tried certainly they had small voice and looking at the party pros who submitted to the Clinton unsustainable mantle we were on a very fated road.

I have a hard time just reading the stuff this early!

so usually it is an end of day fatigue in the morning, but I had off last night.
Right about breakfast though.

That money needs to go to parasitic asshat consultants like Carville.

at the federal level? What am I missing?

Is it possible for the media to cause support fatigue? Seems like it has been all Hillary, all the time.

"inevibility" of her candidacy as portrayed by the media. I certainly reject the "corporatist" choice for my nominee. MSM has been pushing Hilary on us for years now. If they want her, I don't. Add to that the fact she seems incapable of acknowleging the folly of her war votes. I have always believed Hilary to be driven much more by ego than any call to service. Nothing in this campaign has changed my mind.

Woof