|
I am going to take the title for a football metaphor (despite Cook's baseball twist, not covered here). The football metaphor is a good one. The idea is that some football teams focus primarily on doing what they do well, practicing it, and perfecting it---rather than "worrying about what the other team will do" and developing counter strategies. Cook feels Hillary's game is a good one and I agree .
A speech of Hillary's that Cook considers to be a trial "presidential campaign stump speech" cobbles together 14 different groups of Americans Hillary considers "invisible" to Bush including those without health care insurance (46 million), children whose families are under the poverty line, and children in failing schools being underfunded by Bush, etc.
This is contrasted to Edwards more populist approach of the "haves" vs. the "have nots"---which Hillary avoids. Cook points out the obvious---Hillary is running as a centrist Democrat, not a leftist.
But two things occur to me. One is that many people, on both the Left and Right, will recall Hillary's more left-leaning past and assume that her Presidency would reflect some of those long-held beliefs. This can be a positive or a negative, depending on where you sit.
The fact is, Hillary is running now to win in the general election---and hoping she can win in the primaries anyway. The other Democrats, of neccessity, are running as hard as they can to win the pirimaries. If Obama or Edwards win the nomination, rest assured either one will shift to the center for the general election. This is awkward, but generally necessary for most candidates who win the nomination, Democratic or Republican. Hillary is already close to the center. If she wins the nomination, her shift will be smaller---and less embarassing.
As a side note, Gulliani also seems to be running now to win the general election instead of the primaries. I believe his apparent perception (that his position on the Republican side is similar to Hillary's on the Democratic side) is an illusion, one he will become painfully aware of when the primaries start.
The other thought that occurs to me is that I never believe football teams that say they "are just playing their game" and "not worrying about what the other team will do". The classic example is the team that runs a lot. "We just run right at them and see who's tougher." But if you analyzed the playbook it is filled with myriad tiny deceptions and things that take avantage of the other teams weaknesses and tendencies. So it will be with Hillary's campaign---at crunch time.
One thing I picked up from watching the great Bill Belichick, coach of the 3 time Super Bowl winning New England Patriots. He tends to lose his regular season games against the main rivals he will face in the playoffs. Then beat the same team when it counts. I realized at a certain point what he was doing. He purposely doesn't try to win those games---to hide his team's strengths---and real weaknesses---from his key rivals in the unparalleled laboratory of the game itself. Meanwhile, he is focusing---during those regular season games---on learning as much as he can about the real strengths and weaknesses of his rivals---which they tend to reveal to him in their attempt to win the game.
Of course, this strategy causes a few extra losses for the Patriots during the regular season. But the New England Patriots in a good year can afford those loses. So may Hillary be calculating that she can afford to be "outshined" in these early goings. She too, may be focusing on learning more about her rivals and saving her best tricks for later. Not that knowing this would help a rival much. No one else could afford to pursue this strategy.
Meanwhile, in terms of organization building, Hillary is apparently doing an incredible job.
So far, I rate her campaign as better than it looks on the surface, and I agree with Cook that she is doing well.
MSNBC
By Charlie Cook
Updated: 3:42 p.m. ET March 14, 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17613771/
"Clinton's speech was very good and well-written, but it's interesting that while there are plenty of built-in, strong applause lines -- enough for her husband and many other talented speakers to take the roof off the building -- she quite deliberately does not punch them hard.
"The "you are invisible to them" line that many would shout, she states firmly, but without histrionics. By shouting the applause line after each attack, a woman would run the risk of sounding shrill, so Clinton dials it back, making the point but not milking it for all it is worth, like her husband and so many others would...
"Watching Clinton and her operation at work, one gets a strong impression of an extremely competent, highly organized, very focused and enormously disciplined candidate and campaign, not going for home runs or even triples, but consistently punching out singles and doubles. No one was jumping up and down on chairs, or sobbing with emotion, but most seemed very favorably impressed.
"Clearly Clinton is not trying to out-Kennedy Obama or play the passion card hard. She's playing her own game, solidly and competently, almost serenely, betting that Obama's aura will fade as the caucuses and primaries near." |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(267 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
