Don't underestimate the Clintons even if some of the things they do seem so brazen and don't seem to make much sense. These actions might be purposefully targeted at certain segments of the society who they have assessed might not have the benefits of alternative sources of info, and might be impacted by such actions!!
Don't forget that they have years of experience in Arkansas politics which gives them a deep understanding about what works in the small towns, and communities of Ohio, Texas and now coming up - Pennsylvania!!
More below
Some examples of what I am talking about (at least two that come to mind)
- Hillary screaming "Shame on you Barack!" about mailers that had been around for weeks, I now think might have been effective in many sections of Ohio and laid the ground for her victory there.
On the face of it one can think, like I did, that it can only hurt her campaign. But I am now thinking that it might have been effective in reaching different segments of Ohio for whom it might have come across as showing that she is a 'fighter' and that Obama had done her wrong and done something that was shameful!!
I wonder what role Ted Strickland Governor of Ohio played in crafting this seeming WILD attack. This was a day after a debate which was basically a draw, did not give her the bounce she needed, and it seemed that Hillary was out of cards to play!!
- Another example is the repeated attacks on Obama in the last two days, where Hillary vouches that their "Life Experience" qualifies her and McCain for commander in chief, and then says that all Obama has is "a speech".
On the face of it this uses very badly formed wording from a smart lawyer, not to mention how it will harm her among Democrats who will see it for what it is, a dirty attack on her fellow Democratic Party candidate, and endorsement of McCain. However, I have believe that this was targeted at segments of voters that that it will win over, just as the "Shame on you Barack" attack did in Ohio
This diary is a call not to underestimate such attacks and to respond very strongly to such attacks, without necessarily going negative.
The "Shame on You" attack was not, as far as I know, responded to STRONGLY.It was laughed off in the following debate. For many people it might be interpreted as an admission of guilt, even though it might have been because of a desire to stay on a higher plane.
Additional comments:
******************************
Tearing down a candidate is not a result of a single attack but builds on previous attacks.
The polls the days following Hillary's raving "Shame on You!!", as I remember, did not show any bounce for her. However, I believe that it laid something that following attacks built on, and something that people later could go back to in their minds and connect with attacks that followed.
The attacks on John Kerry's honorable service in Viet Nam built one-on-the-other to form an irreversible impression that turned the tide on him. I don't think this is likely happen to Obama to the same extent but it could solidify and maybe even expand Hillary's base of support!!
Yes We Can build a working coalition that will be able to step up and face the challenges staring us in the face!!!