Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Two Kinds of Hillary Hubris

As New Hampshire prepares to vote, pundits are filing Clinton campaign death notices as confidently as they trumpeted her inevitability only weeks ago.

The coronation was premature, and the obituaries may be, too. The last time anyone looked, Matt Drudge was not empowered to pick convention delegates.

Observers detect a few tears and deride the woman who sheds them, forgetting that John Boehner, the House Republican leader, weeps buckets all the time.

Bill Clinton seems to lose his mojo with New Hampshire crowds for a day, and the New York Times finds a headline in it.

There is at least as much hubris in the herd journalism that is trampling the Clintons now as there was in their presumption that the Presidency was theirs by right of succession--and considerably more nastiness.

These observations come from a non-admirer of the Clinton campaign who suggested last summer that playing it safe could lead to a 21st century version of what Harry Truman did in 1948 to the poll-anointed sure bet, Gov. Thomas Dewey of New York, who squandered a big lead in the polls by taking voters for granted.

Hillary Clinton's hopes for the Presidency may indeed be thwarted, but it's not over until it's over, no matter what the often-wrong-but-never-in-doubt political pundits say.

1 comment:

Liza said...

You are right, of course. It's far from over especially when half the country votes on Super Duper Tuesday. People like to believe that their votes count, yet it's hard not to be influenced by what has already happened.

If Edwards is third in New Hampshire today, it seems likely that some of his would be supporters will gravitate mostly toward Obama. This is about money as much as anything, and its hard to get money when you are third and beyond.

No matter how you look at it, Iowa and New Hampshire have an immense amount of influence.