The New Republic

This latest release from the Clinton camp seems to be trying to tell us something:

The Politics Of Pile-On

What happens when the “politics of pile-on” replaces the “politics of hope?”

Hillary comes out on top.

Despite the best efforts of her six fellow candidates to trip her
up, Senator Clinton stood strong and made her case on critical issues
like Iran, Iraq and Social Security. She kept her focus on the real
target in this election: Republicans and the Bush Administration.
Instead of going after the other Democrats, Hillary made the argument
for why change is needed and why she has the strength and experience to
lead the Democratic Party in its efforts to make that change happen.

Sadly, Senator Obama caved to the pressure of the pundits and
fundraisers who demanded that he go negative and abandoned the
"politics of hope" message that sparked so much interest in him early
in the campaign. Meanwhile, Senator Edwards doubled down in his effort
to become the guy best known for attacking other Democrats. Not to be
outdone, the rest of the pack followed suit and piled on in the hope
that they’d get some media attention.

But with each attack, Senators Obama and Edwards undermined the
central premises of their own candidacies. The sunny speeches and rosy
rhetoric that once characterized their remarks has now been replaced by
the kinds of jabs one typically sees from candidates desperate to gain
traction in the polls.

The American people are looking for a President who can stand strong and come out ahead under any circumstances.

Last night, once again, that person was Hillary Clinton.

One strong woman.

[Emphasis added]

Get the hint?

--Michael Crowley 

share this article on facebook or twitter print this article