Even on the very last day of the campaign, when Montana and South Dakota went to the polls, Bill still thought he could get his wife the nomination through bullying:
Quote:Another member of the inner circle described Bill Clinton as coming "unhinged" in the final hours, raising his voice in phone calls with superdelegates, constantly revisiting his wife's options for staying in the race. "He keeps asking me, 'What about so-and-so? What about so-and-so?' " the supporter recalled, saying the former president wanted constant updates on superdelegate moves.
He'd been egged on by poisonous advisers like Penn, of course, who'd been put at distance from the campaign's heart far too late:
Quote:Penn also thought a far more aggressive strategy was needed in the effort to corral superdelegates. "Brute force" was his recommendation.
That's both from
this WaPo story.
In short - the Clinton campaign
had the establishment support from the start. But it managed to alienate much of that same establishment during the campaign, by the way it dealt with party prominents and superdelegates, and by the way they ran the campaign itself. An example of the latter is how Obama bagged the early endorsement of Kennedy after the way the Clintons dealt with race in the run-up to the SC primary turned him off. An example of the former is how Bill Richardson recounted the two campaigns' approaches to him once he dropped out of the race.
The Clintons basically thought that the establishment was theirs, belonged to them, and that they were still in a position to will and bully it into doing its bidding. Instead, that same behaviour just made party prominents all the more eager to jump onto the Obama bandwagon as soon as it became clear that he was firing up the voters. For that, the Clintons have noone but themselves to blame.
From
the New York Times:
Quote:superdelegates were showing an independence that the Clinton campaign had not counted on, not quite buying her argument that she was more electable than Mr. Obama. [..]
The Clintons certainly tried, interviews with two dozen superdelegates found. Many said that the Clintons had intensely pressured them and that their endorsements became a test of personal loyalty, subject to a hard sell. At the same time, many said they were drawn to the Obama campaign's excitement. [..]
Patsy Arceneaux, a National Committee member from Louisiana who had a friendship with the Clintons, was persuaded early this year to support Mrs. Clinton. But when Mr. Clinton made what she saw as racially inflammatory comments in South Carolina, Ms. Arceneaux said she developed serious misgivings about supporting Mrs. Clinton.
After switching to Mr. Obama two weeks ago, the Clinton campaign bombarded her with dozens of calls, she said. "You can't imagine how stressful this has been," Ms. Arceneaux said. "It had gotten to where my life had just been taken over by this."
Debbie Marquez, a superdelegate from Colorado, said she had made up her mind to shift to Mr. Obama, largely because he opposed the Iraq war from the start. The ex-president called and talked for 45 minutes, she said.
"When people talk about the finger wagging and lecturing in his speeches, I kind of felt that was going on over the phone," Ms. Marquez said.
In the end, she was not swayed.
You know, the feeling I get from all these stories is that the Clintons were in a position of overriding power for so long, they were like some long-seated executive of a corporation. They are so utterly used to getting their way no matter what, to being able to bully or intimidate just about anyone into submission if necessary, they were just unprepared for the situation that arose this year. A situation where, in Obama, they had found an equal. And wherein they thus needed to rely on sheer
persuasion rather than orders. Where they had to fight for hearts and minds, because strongarming just didnt work if there was an equally powerful opponent in the race.
If you're the supreme boss, whether you're Bush or Murdoch, you can yell at people without suffering from it. But if there's an attractive alternative, you've got to actually
win people over. And they couldnt. They'd just unlearnt how to do that. I mean, here's
that telling Richardson quote again:
Quote:Their manner of courtship -- one wooing, the other arm-twisting -- seemed to reflect the candidates' different personalities and campaign styles, he said.
Obama preferred the soft sell, calling Richardson every three days or so -- "dialing the phone himself, no operator" -- for long discussions about policy and campaign issues. The two developed a bantering relationship, building on the camaraderie they shared off-camera during debates [..].
Clinton was more persistent and tactical. There were eight or more phone calls a day, Richardson said: "Bill calling, Hillary calling, friends of mine that were in the Clinton administration, Clinton operatives, Clinton Hispanic operatives, New Mexico Clinton Hispanic operatives."
Some callers, who suggested Richardson had an obligation to back Clinton, did more harm than good. "I think the Clintons have a feeling of entitlement . . . that the presidency was theirs," Richardson said, and the persistent lobbying from "Washington establishment types" convinced him of a need for some fresher faces on the scene. [..]
It's like - you take the executive top dog of a big corporate international, and you move him down to a mid-level management position, where he needs to work in a team.
But you dont tell him about it. So he doesnt know, and just goes on as he always did - and soon, the tensions and resentments flare and everyone in the office starts really hating the guy. And he's just outraged because who do these people think they are? How can they just ignore him like that, or twist his words around, or gang up on him? He just doesnt have the skills for the situation anymore.
That seems to have been the case with the Clintons, and specifically with Bill.
