SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home What Her Victory Looked Like

JANUARY 9, 2008

What Her Victory Looked Like

BY MICHAEL CROWLEY

MANCHESTER, NH--

For the reporters covering her campaign, the first clear sign that Hillary Clinton would win the New Hampshire primary came in the form of a beaming Terry McAuliffe. At roughly 10:30 Tuesday night, the former Democratic Party chairman and longtime Friend Of The Clintons appeared in the filing center where reporters had just hours earlier been prepared to type out Hillary's obituary to proclaim victory. "This is a big, big win for us," said McAuliffe to the clutch of stunned reporters gathered around him.

I had last seen McAuliffe the previous Thursday night, just after Hillary's humiliation at the hands of Barack Obama in Iowa. Standing onstage at Hillary's post-caucus event at a Des Moines hotel, he'd looked strained and tired, interrupting his bursts of good cheer with worried glances at his BlackBerry. But now McAuliffe, who is tall and athletic, had the cocky glow of a college quarterback who had just lobbed a winning touchdown pass. "My phone, the last hour, has been ringing off the hook," he said with a measure of glee.

McAuliffe wasn't the only one glowing. Press aide Jay Carson, a dashing young man who recently had taken on the look of an undertaker, struggled to suppress grins as he took questions from reporters at his candidate's victory event. Another communications hand, Phil Singer, wandered the college gymnasium looking positively blissed-out, somewhere between stoned and post-coital. Even Hillary's famously gruff and sometimes intimidating communications director, Howard Wolfson, cracked a rare smile by the television camera riser as he received a series of congratulatory hugs from current and former Clintonites, including the writer-cum-advisor (and TNR alum) Sidney Blumenthal, and delivered valedictory spin for reporters who, just hours before, had been gossiping about his potential ouster from the campaign.

These looks of relief belied the campaign's earlier spin that the Iowa results had been a trivial annoyance. It was clear just how fully Hillary's aides felt they'd been staring political death in the face. Nor had any of them expected their comeback. After the caucuses I asked one stubbornly on-message Clintonite what he thought could possibly stop the narrative of Hillary's demise in the mere four days between Iowa and the New Hampshire vote. He shrugged his shoulders, shook his head, and offered a fatalistic, "I don't know."

On the ground in New Hampshire, the Clinton team took out their frustrations on the media. The campaign lashed out against the press in surprisingly brazen terms--from Bill Clinton's fury that Obama was benefiting from "the biggest fairy tale I have ever seen" to Hillary's complaint that Obama and John Edwards have been "given pretty much a free ride" to off-the-record harangues by Clinton surrogates that reporters weren't doing their jobs properly. (Bill Clinton also tossed in an implication that sexism was at work when he lamented a day before the primary that he "can't make her younger, taller, male.") "I guess now they're complaining about the vast left-wing conspiracy," an aide to a rival campaign chortled on Tuesday afternoon.

This was nothing new: Clintonland has always stewed with resentment for the press. In doing so, they sometimes overlook the unique advantages the media offers Hillary. For years her celebrity power and the long reach of the Clinton machine have allowed her aides to leverage access and intimidate critics. (As Hillary faltered in recent weeks, some reporters and operatives questioned whether resentment over the campaign's rough press tactics had finally led to a serious backlash.) But it's also indisputable that false stories about Hillary spread with Ebola-like virulence, and that Hillary bashing brings easy rewards, as the Drudge Report demonstrates every day. Likewise, it was obvious that the media was swooning for Obama. One can only imagine the response in Clintonland when NBC's Brian Williams explained that one of the network's Obama reporters had recently told him that "it's hard to stay objective covering this guy."

But in the final stretch here, it may have been the media's peculiar obsession with Hillary that rescued her. Her aides said that two moments were critical. One was the flash of temper she displayed at Saturday night's debate, after Obama and Edwards seemed to be teaming up on her as an agent of the Washington "status quo," as Edwards put it. The other was her now-famous near-teary moment in a Portsmouth cafe after one woman asked about her travails in public life. Both episodes drew huge amounts of attention precisely because the nation is so fascinated by what makes her tick. For weeks Hillary's aides had labored to make her seem less remote and imperious, more human and likeable. Hence the trail appearances of Dorothy Rodham and Chelsea Clinton. But it seems to have taken a pair of spontaneous moments--replayed ad infinitum on MSNBC and Fox, and debated on tens of thousands of websites--in which Hillary briefly dropped her robotic faade to convince voters (especially women sympathetic to the campaign's implicit cries of sexism) that she is, as Hillary herself put it in one interview, "a real person."

Shortly before midnight, in what must have been among the night's sweetest moments, Wolfson climbed on the riser for an interview with MSNBC's Chris Matthews, a campaign nemesis consistently critical of Hillary. Just two days earlier Matthews had jousted with the candidate at a press conference at which he urged her to appear on his show. "Yeah right," Hillary replied sardonically, marveling, "I just don't know what to do with men who are obsessed with me." But now Matthews, who'd spent the past several days in an apparent swoon for Obama, was chastened. Wrapping up his segment with Wolfson, the "Hardball" host offered his guest an unusually solemn declaration: "I will never underestimate Hillary Clinton again." Wolfson had conducted the interview with his typical grim face. But when he climbed down from the riser, he allowed himself a smile.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 24 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

24 comments

Chris Matthews is really not impressive at all.  I have been watching a lot of the coverage and have had too much of him.  

While I'm on this line of thought, let me say here that the TNR coverage has been outstanding.  I especially enjoy your posts, Mr Crowley.  Smart, fact-filled, well-written and fun to read.  For example, I loved your description of Mr Singer, "looking positively blissed-out, somewhere between stoned and post-coital".  

Looking forward to more.

Neil  

- purcellneil

January 9, 2008 at 7:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If it is remotely true (and I suspect it is) that the "anger moment" and the "tears" turned around Clinton's prospects by 10 percentage points or more in New Hampshire, what is really belied here is the famed seriousness with which the voters in the early "retail" states take their duties.  To any reasonable observer, neither of these moments told anything useful about Clinton - neither what her policy positions would be, nor how she would govern.

Bill Clinton spent the weekend demeaning the fairytale promise of an Obama campaign, while Hillary Clinton rescued hers with pure political theatre, sans even the semblance of sincerity, or the genuinely inspirational component that Obama throws into his theatre.

Up until now, I had preferred Obama or Edwards over Clinton, but figured I could become a reasonably enthusiastic support of Clinton, should the need arise in the general election.  What I've seen in the last week makes me want to sit out the whole affair, if Clinton is the nominee.

- sdemuth

January 9, 2008 at 7:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hilary's 'Oprah' moment.....did the trick?

I'm fairly certain that my favorite Northeasterner John Irving would fashion some hilarity at such a mover.

- boxofrox

January 9, 2008 at 9:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

um...no post 'exhileration" comment from your boss?  I can almost hear the fang grinding from here...

- thejauntyboulevardier

January 9, 2008 at 10:24am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, speaking of swooning, where the heck is Noam? I need my spin fix to figure out how a 3 point win in an election where a quarter million people voted is insignificant in light of a couple thousand Iowan activists who split their votes evenly three ways.  

- schrek2000

January 9, 2008 at 12:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

sdemuth hits the nail on the head. There was nothing that either of the Clintons did or said that should have legitimately revived her campaign. To the contrary, the last few days gave us a portrait of desperation, misinformation and nastiness that does not sit well. I, too, would sit out the campaign if Hillary is the nominee or, in the event of a Bloomberg candidacy, happily support and work for his third party effort.

- BHLnyc

January 9, 2008 at 2:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How Hillary and the media suckered the ladies of New Hampshire and squeaked out a victory.

As everyone who was watching CNN and MSNBC yesterday could see, the pundits and journalists were going on and on about how if Obama walked away with New Hampshire easily it was all going to be over, and they were pushing the same thing over at Daily Kos and other blog sites.

The mainstream media was pushing the sympathy buttons all day for Hillary, replaying her teary-eyed concerns over and over, MINUS THE JABS SHE TOOK AT OBAMA OF COURSE, because they all realize that if Obama had taken New Hampshire, thousands of journalists on the campaign trail would quickly find themselves out of work, and the networks would watch as their viewership plummets off the rating scales because no one would be interested in watching if it's already decided.  So what we have here is a case of motivated self-interest by the media to keep this race alive.

There are a lot of journalists out there who are staying in nice hotels and eating much better than they are accustomed, and that will now continue as long as they can prop up Clinton, and play upon the sympathy of women to keep her in the race.  I wonder how long this tactic will work?  

Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?  --  New York Times op-ed

www.nytimes.com/.../08dowd.html

[The Obama campaign calculated that they had the women’s vote over the weekend but watched it slip away in the track of her tears.

At the Portsmouth cafe on Monday, talking to a group of mostly women, she blinked back her misty dread of where Obama’s “false hopes” will lead us — “I just don’t want to see us fall backwards,” she said tremulously — in time to smack her rival: “But some of us are right and some of us are wrong. Some of us are ready and some of us are not.”

There was a poignancy about the moment, seeing Hillary crack with exhaustion from decades of yearning to be the principal rather than the plus-one. But there was a whiff of Nixonian self-pity about her choking up. What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her. In a weirdly narcissistic way, she was crying for us. But it was grimly typical of her that what finally made her break down was the prospect of losing. ]

Clinton -- 112,238

Obama -- 104,757

Not much of a margin there.

Obama continues to be the choice of young people .

In the two largest college towns in New Hampshire, Obama still won easily.  This is where his base of support is strongest, with new voters.

Hanover

Obama -- 58.16%

Clinton -- 12.16%

Durham

Obama -- 48.02%

Clinton -- 29.84%

Obama was also the preference of the more successful and better educated in New Hampshire.

- AaronBBrown

January 9, 2008 at 2:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh fer chrissake, Aaron, be gracious for a minute, huh? I don't believe in the Obama-Messiah but I granted him his due when he won IA; give our side's victor in NH the same courtesy. He won fairly; she won fairly; they're obviously both strong candidates.

Same team, remember?

- teplukhin2you

January 9, 2008 at 2:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, can it, Aaron. She WON, fair and square, just as your man won, fair and square, in Iowa. Be gracious, for a day anyway.

Same team, remember?

- teplukhin2you

January 9, 2008 at 2:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Right on, tep. I'm concededly a Clinton supporter, nee Biden, have respect for Obama's win last week, but talk about crybabies today! A quarter million people voted and Hillary won by a field goal of points. A few thousand Iowans showed up at caucuses and Obama was supposed to be annointed without further discussion?  

He phoned in the debate, was snidely dismissive of this accomplished woman ("you're likable enough, Hillary"!). And then presumes to claim the mantle of Kennedy and King who worked for years to move this country forward, while he had a couple cups of coffee in a Chicago neighborhood and moved on to a safe state senate seat? Oh, please.

Look...this is good for all of us; for each of the candidates, for the party and for the ultimate winner, Hillary or Barack. It will make them sharper, tougher, and better capable to deal with what's coming from the Republicans.

- schrek2000

January 9, 2008 at 3:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Obama was also the preference of the more successful and better educated in New Hampshire."

So was President Tsongas, President Hart, President Dole, President H.W. Bush (in 1980), President Bradley, President McCarthy, and let us not forget President Kefauver.

As we all know, the candidate of the "more successful and better educated" always wins the election. I should know. I am 44, grad school educated, upper middle class, elitist, former Gary Hart staffer/delegate.

Keep hope and dreams alive.

- pbriley

January 9, 2008 at 3:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Aaron...I second tep. I always enjoy your posts. The past two days though, your Clinton animus seems to be getting the best of you. I like Obama too but he failed to deliver the KO punch. Clinton, like her or not, fought her way back into the game and any fair minded observer would at least give her a begrudged respect for her capacity to counter punch her way off the ropes.

I tip my hat to her.

- thejauntyboulevardier

January 9, 2008 at 3:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Remember Dukakis? IIRC he was up by like 20 points in the summer of 1988, and then got his head handed to him by Bush pere in the general because he _hadn't been tested in the primaries_.

This is the best thing to happen to Obama since Geri Ryan freaked out at Club Sade. Be grateful, Obamamaniacs. Hell, we should all be grateful.

- teplukhin2you

January 9, 2008 at 3:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, maybe not so very fair and square, with the unfair abortion mailer they sent out.  The big difference between these two early states is, in my eyes, the amount of time spent there by the candidates.  Not including Michael Whouley.  Truth will out, but only over a period of time.  I'm worried about Super Tuesday now, very much.

- psantillana

January 9, 2008 at 3:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Media Analysis: The “Tweety Effect” Runs Rampant

firedoglake.com/.../media-analysis-the-tweety-effect-runs-rampant

Christy Hardin is using this to make a point about media bias, but I think she's a bit naïve in her analysis and her understanding of the manipulative power of the media.  Of course none of these people ever consider the impact of their words before they voiced them, these things just slip out.

Let's see how do we motivate women to support Hillary again, and keep this whole thing rolling, here's an example of a conversation almost sure to accomplish this goal.  You think this kind of thing pisses women off enough to vote for just about any woman?  Ya think?

We all know that Chris Matthews would never stoop to manipulation, he's an impartial journalist with no political agenda right?

I wonder what the effect would be if Matthews and others start making similar comments about Obama's race, you think that would motivate people?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Mika Brzezinski: Do you think...that there was a turn at the last minute for some voters, given the really sharp twist in the media in terms of how they went negative...

Chris Matthews: It's not in the polling. I'm just saying, it's not in the polling data.

Brzezinski: I know, that's my point. Because people went to the polls throughout the day, and maybe changed their minds, and maybe were turned off by by what they saw. By these nasty headlines.

Matthews: Well, I don't know if they all read the NYPost.

Brzezinski: In taking after her for crying.

Matthews: I think the Hillary appeal has always been about the mix of toughness and sympathy. Let's not forget, and I'll be brutal, the reason she's a US Senator, the reason she's a candidate for President, the reason she may be a front runner, is that her husband messed around.

Brzezinski: Yeah, but...

Matthews: That's how she got to be a Senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win it on her merit, she won because everybody felt, "My God, this woman stood up under humiliation," right? That's what happened. That's how it happened. In 1998, she went to NY and campaigned for Chuck Schumer as almost like the grieving widow of absurdity, and she did it so well and courageously. But it was about the humilation of Bill Clinton.

Brzezinski: Um...NO, okay? Well, you could take it a step back, and say that SHE put Bill Clinton where he is and then he messed around and she was humiliated and people felt sorry for her. And she does have more to her than being a victim. She does have more to her. [Mika smacks him on the arm.]

Matthews: Ow. I agree. You hit me? Hit him. [pointing to Scarborough, who cannot get to the commercial break fast enough...]

- AaronBBrown

January 9, 2008 at 4:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, tep, you read Kass in the Trib today? Here's a very mild sample of what's coming, mon freres Obamaiere. And the Tribune adores Obama to boot!

www.chicagotribune.com/.../chi-kass_09jan09,0,4349895.column

(Funny line about Seven of Nine, by the way. Nice.)

- schrek2000

January 9, 2008 at 4:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow. I thought our crowd was rough. Clever guy, though, fun read.

- teplukhin2you

January 9, 2008 at 5:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

schrek2000,

You said, 'I need my spin fix to figure out how a 3 point win in an election where a quarter million people voted is insignificant in light of a couple thousand Iowan activists who split their votes evenly three ways.'

A 'couple thousand' Iowa activists?  Try two hundred and thirty thousand.  Pretty close to a quarter million, innit?

'Split their votes evenly?'  Seems to me, Obama's margin in Iowa was 9%.  Sure, that was the delegate count, not votes, which weren't counted.  But where do you think BHO did better, in the cities or in the rural counties, the latter being where votes are over-represented?  And any way you slice it, a 9 point margin looks a hell of a lot less 'evenly split' than a 3 point margin.

Please know the facts before you open your trap.

- aeromonas

January 9, 2008 at 5:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

schrek2000

John Kass, is a squirming right wing worm, no surprise that his whole piece was a bunch of build up with absolutely no substance whatsoever.

Hard to believe anyone would waste their time posting such drivel, but I suppose when all you've got is rhetoric and no cards to back it up, all you can do is bluff.

I love to play poker with these types.

- AaronBBrown

January 9, 2008 at 7:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, what the heck happened to "disagreeing without being disagreeable"?? Shut your trap? Such language. I'm not sure "BHO" would approve.

Such thin skin doesn't bode well for the long, hard slog ahead. Hope your guy is tougher. I think he is and sure as hell hope so if he does win the nomination. Kass is lilacs and roses compared to what's coming.

- schrek2000

January 10, 2008 at 1:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I didn't say 'shut your trap.'  I said, 'Know your facts before you open it.'  Big difference.

- aeromonas

January 10, 2008 at 2:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And my annoyance with your post was less an indication of thin skinnedness on my part, than an intolerance of falsity.

- aeromonas

January 10, 2008 at 3:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Intolerance". Thank you so much for confirming what I worry about most about most in terms of my Obama friends' attitudes about disagreement, opposition or mistake, even assuming one is made.

The main belief I've been trying to commmunicate here and elsewhere is that IA and NH were two very different elections in terms of demographics, voting structure and dynamics. Each extremely capable candidate lost one, each won one. Bravo/brava to each. And there are solid, important reasons for each win/loss about strentghts, weakenesses, appeal or limits to appeal.Now each, hopefully, will learn and adjust. (I'd watch for Barack to be more generous in acknowledging Hillary's history of accomplishment and work; Hillary should be far more acknowledging of the fire Barack has lit and the way he inspires. That will make for a smoother transition to the general once the nominee is decided, whomever he/she may be. Good!)

But what concerns me is what seems like some Obama supporters' belief in the political supernatural; i.e. that the all powerful Hillary mesmerized the New Hampshire chumps with her parently false display of emotion and that the idiot voters fell for it! Oh, those fools---why couldn't they understand like I did!

I saw this attitude rampant in the Kerry campaign and the net results are well known. To the extent I'm right and the attitude exists, I hope it changes for all our sakes...but for me to say I find it "intolerable" would in my view be presumptuous.

- schrek2000

January 10, 2008 at 10:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hey, sorry for all th typos, but am an old, two fingered typist. And just saw that Kerry has endorsed Barack. Congrats to him.  

- schrek2000

January 10, 2008 at 10:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close