Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

LITTWIN: Clinton's male critics ignited female firestorm

By Mike Littwin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published January 9, 2008 at 8:33 p.m.

Text size  

BOSTON — It's the day after, and as the stragglers pull down the circus tents and pull up the campaign signs on the way out of New Hampshire, what everyone is still struggling to figure out is what went right for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As we now know, everyone was wrong about the Democratic primary vote, including, yes, me and — I might add — the Clintons themselves. Everything seemed to indicate an impressive Barack Obama victory, except, of course, the actual vote.

I've seen and heard a number of explanations, but maybe the best one comes from Joe Keefe, a former Democratic state chairman here and an Obama backer. He said he saw a pro-Hillary backlash — and the backlash was against, uh, us (by which I mean either the left- or right- wing media conspiracy). Obama was, in effect, so much collateral damage.

Keefe told USA Today that there were too many "male talking heads" saying that Clinton was done. He said, "Everyone was calling the race too early and a little too gleefully, and I think women resented it."

If you read the exit polls, it's clear that women decided the race. Women made up 57 percent of the Democratic electorate in New Hampshire, and, of the women voters, Clinton got 46 percent and Obama 34.

None of the other numbers really matter. That's where the vote was decided. But how? And, while we're at it, why?

The pollsters got that wrong, too. So did the Clinton people. And the Obama people. Obama narrowly won the women's vote in Iowa, and the polls suggested the vote would split evenly here.

What changed everything may have been not the Clinton near-tears — but the reaction to the near-tears. Yes (he said with fake humility), I did write that Clinton's choking-up episode would probably help her, but I didn't think it would help her nearly enough to win. In fact, I thought Obama would win going away.

But what must have helped Clinton is that we seem to live in a post-Muskie world in which male politicians now get to cry, but women still do not. And so Romney can tear up, just as Reagan did, and Bush did, and just as Clinton — Bill Clinton, that is — would often do while biting on that well-nibbled lower lip.

And then, of course, there was the knee-jerk charge that Clinton was faking it. We know faking when we see it — and that wasn't it. But the Clinton-haters went immediately into the Hillary-is- not-a-real-human default position.

And that allows Clinton to say on Fox News: "Maybe it's a little more challenging for a woman in this position because obviously we know what people will say, but maybe I have liberated us to actually let women be human beings in public life."

Old lesson: When the Clintons are attacked, they win. And even though Obama didn't really attack and John Edwards didn't attack very hard, the old lesson still holds.

Clinton won, even though she knocked Obama for — of all things — being a wonderful speaker. And even though she made the tortured case that Martin Luther King Jr. needed a president like Lyndon Johnson to get legislation passed. And even though Bill Clinton risked further angering the African-American base (which doesn't exist, of course, in New Hampshire) by saying that Obama's image was "a fairy tale."

But the election moves on.

Nevada is next for the Democrats and then it's on to South Carolina, where half the Democratic voters are black. In Las Vegas on Wednesday, Obama was endorsed by the culinary workers union — meaning, I guess, he's now eligible for the free hotel buffet. And, according to The New York Times report, D. Taylor, the union's secretary and treasurer, joked about Nevada vs. Iowa and New Hampshire by saying, "We're not just white bread here. We got pumpernickel. We've got whole wheat and we've got rye."

But don't take that to mean that New Hampshire wasn't important. It was critical. New Hampshire is where you make your argument on the ground, and we saw excellent ground games save Clinton's campaign and John McCain's as well. Both, of course, are relentless campaigners. McCain, who had run out of money in the summer, gambled everything on New Hampshire. He might have quit, but, being McCain, he didn't really know how. Clinton, meanwhile, thought she could spin a five-point loss here into a comeback victory, but, in the end, she didn't need to spin at all.

And now?

Let's just say no one really knows. Mike Huckabee, who is favored now in South Carolina, has said he will challenge Mitt Romney and McCain in Michigan, which is up next for Republicans. Rudy Giuliani is still hanging out in Florida — where he's tanned, rested and ready? — and hoping for a split vote everywhere else. The smart money — if there's any left — is betting that the Republicans will go beyond the 22-state Tsunami Tuesday set for Feb. 5.

And it may be the same on the Democratic side. It can't be long before John Edwards drops out of the race. I mean, how long do you get to make the electability argument if you don't actually win any states? Meanwhile, you can expect Clinton to continue to say Obama's speeches are empty rhetoric.

And you can expect Obama, the law professor, to add policy to hope in his stump speech.

And if Obama and Clinton split the Feb. 5 vote, the race could go to Ohio in March. It could go to Pennsylvania on April 22.

It could go — although probably only in a political reporter's dream — all the way to the convention.

Littwinm@RockyMountain News.com

Comments

  • January 10, 2008

    12:17 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Nico writes:

    It is sad to see that so many people are selfishly thinking " whats in it for me " instead of what is good for this country. Both Clinton's were in trouble in the 'Whitewater' scandal. I, for one, have a big problem with a 'first lady' that is an adulterer, liar, cheater and home wrecker. Not to mention setting up this country for disaster after he left office. Don't believe me, ask the experts. Imagine, this country faces a huge crisis and what would Hillary do? Start crying. If we ever needed strong, and righteous, leadership it is now. The time is now for those with integrity and a sense of righteousness to act. Vote for morals.

  • January 10, 2008

    5:56 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Alive writes:

    Hey Littwin, you go girl!