DAVID WHITESOCK — While on a campaign visit in South Dakota today, Sen. Hillary Clinton invoked the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968 as a justification for staying in the race. Her comments came while being interviewed by the Argus Leader editorial board. Video below the jump.
This reference is unfathomable. Obviously, this is an unique campaign with the most viable female candidate for president, ever; and the first ever viable African American candidate for the office. There are some, even Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod, who suggest her intention was not to invoke the idea that if Sen. Obama were assasinated (in June), that she would be ‘available’ to take over the party’s nomination, were not necessarily intentional.
Okay, so this is how the Obama campaign has played things all along. They play nice. I like that about the Obama campaign.
However, Sen. Clinton is a smart woman. When speaking off the cuff, she does have a strong sense of historical context, I’ll grant her that, but this inference is historically and politically unforgivable (at least until after the Nov. election).
Her comments are insane to say the least. The problem I have with the current state of political campaigning, is with the impact the media has on the behavior of the candidates. Obviously, the candidates want to get out and speak to, or “reach,” as many potential voters as possible. Their most efficient method for attaining this goal is to “invite” the media (local and national) to every single event they have planned — even if that means a walk-trough of a local diner or (Brandon, SD) grocery store. What is happening more frequently because of this “media strategy,” is that candidates find themselves having every utterance they speak recorded and distributed to the masses in some way, shape, or form (Can you say “Macaca?”)
It’s clear that we are all human make mistakes, especially speaking mistakes — their a dime-a-dozen. The mistakes are more so when cameras and microphones are picking up everything the candidates say. They are also amplified. It makes me wonder, why is it that political strategists who work for these candidates have not yet told their clients to shut the hell up? The media isn’t going anywhere. They will cover what you have to say when you step before the microphones. And you you say something, it will get distributed throughout the country is such a fashion that if what you said was of some substance and importance, those that want to hear it, will.
Obama played the Rev. Wright issue perfectly. He didn’t step in front of a microphone for days. He took a deep breath, wrote a speech, and told the country in fell swoop what he thought. End of story. He’s not even really bothered much by that whole incident (amplified by the media, or not).
Some have suggested that Sen. Clinton’s remarkes today in Sioux Falls were possible the result of an exhausted campaigner, that she should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sorry. No benefit here. Once these candidates realize that they don’t need to make sure that every camera in the country captures every word they say, and went back to less words mean more, then politicians may get some of their credibility back, at least as campaigners.
Clinton Invokes Assasination in South Dakota
Tags: argus leader, barak obama, election, hillary clinton, politics, south dakota
DAVID WHITESOCK — While on a campaign visit in South Dakota today, Sen. Hillary Clinton invoked the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968 as a justification for staying in the race. Her comments came while being interviewed by the Argus Leader editorial board. Video below the jump.
This reference is unfathomable. Obviously, this is an unique campaign with the most viable female candidate for president, ever; and the first ever viable African American candidate for the office. There are some, even Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod, who suggest her intention was not to invoke the idea that if Sen. Obama were assasinated (in June), that she would be ‘available’ to take over the party’s nomination, were not necessarily intentional.
Okay, so this is how the Obama campaign has played things all along. They play nice. I like that about the Obama campaign.
However, Sen. Clinton is a smart woman. When speaking off the cuff, she does have a strong sense of historical context, I’ll grant her that, but this inference is historically and politically unforgivable (at least until after the Nov. election).
Her comments are insane to say the least. The problem I have with the current state of political campaigning, is with the impact the media has on the behavior of the candidates. Obviously, the candidates want to get out and speak to, or “reach,” as many potential voters as possible. Their most efficient method for attaining this goal is to “invite” the media (local and national) to every single event they have planned — even if that means a walk-trough of a local diner or (Brandon, SD) grocery store. What is happening more frequently because of this “media strategy,” is that candidates find themselves having every utterance they speak recorded and distributed to the masses in some way, shape, or form (Can you say “Macaca?”)
It’s clear that we are all human make mistakes, especially speaking mistakes — their a dime-a-dozen. The mistakes are more so when cameras and microphones are picking up everything the candidates say. They are also amplified. It makes me wonder, why is it that political strategists who work for these candidates have not yet told their clients to shut the hell up? The media isn’t going anywhere. They will cover what you have to say when you step before the microphones. And you you say something, it will get distributed throughout the country is such a fashion that if what you said was of some substance and importance, those that want to hear it, will.
Obama played the Rev. Wright issue perfectly. He didn’t step in front of a microphone for days. He took a deep breath, wrote a speech, and told the country in fell swoop what he thought. End of story. He’s not even really bothered much by that whole incident (amplified by the media, or not).
Some have suggested that Sen. Clinton’s remarkes today in Sioux Falls were possible the result of an exhausted campaigner, that she should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sorry. No benefit here. Once these candidates realize that they don’t need to make sure that every camera in the country captures every word they say, and went back to less words mean more, then politicians may get some of their credibility back, at least as campaigners.
Worthy of viewing, Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on HRC’s remarks.