Clinton's greatest risk

[BeyondGeography]

By Ronald Brownstein

<Detroit - After watching New York Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) juggle pointed questions before nearly 1,000 union members here earlier this month, it was easy to imagine how she might pull away from her rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination. But it also was possible to see how she might stumble on the way.>

<...Clinton still excels more at the prose than the poetry of politics; there was more energy in the room when she arrived than when she left. Several in the crowd worried about whether she can win a general election – partly because they doubt that America will elect a woman, but mostly because they fear that Republicans will reprise scandal allegations against both Clintons.

Some of these activists also questioned whether she (and her husband) sufficiently represent the party's liberal base. Usually that sentiment manifests in skepticism about her stance on Iraq, but here it translated into a barbed question about her service, from 1986 to 1992, on Wal-Mart's board of directors.

The most worrisome sign for Clinton at the meeting was her own caution. Asked whether she would support higher automotive fuel economy standards – an overdue idea that the autoworkers have joined the auto companies in fighting – Clinton implied that she would, but never directly answered. Nor, while talking tough on trade, did she acknowledge how much the American auto companies' miscalculations have contributed to their decline. Both answers contrasted badly with Obama, who, during a recent Detroit speech, forthrightly endorsed better fuel economy and chastised the companies for building too many cars that consumers disdained.

With such timidity, Clinton risks sharpening one of her detractors' best weapons – the charge that calculation, not conviction, is her compass. Front-runners dislike risk, but in her case, the riskiest move might be playing it safe.>

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0618/p09s01-coop.html

[MannyGoldstein]

1. The Triangulator

Perhaps that should be her new nickname. Has a ring to it.

[earthlover]

2. Hillary is trapped by her past

In the past, she had to triangulate. She had to take conservative positions or back away from liberal ones, because she didn't want to be viewed as too liberal. Because she WAS portrayed as too liberal. In my view, this is why she voted for Iraq. I give her credit for knowing it was wrong. I believe she was trapped into voting for it anyway because she felt that voting no would have doomed her politically.

She has strived more than most to create a brand for herself. She had been branded by others as a liberal, and she wanted to recreate herself as not being that way.

What she did not predict was how Iraq would become so unpopular just about the time 08 came around.

This has hurt her in other ways. It has illustrated how she has packaged herself for political gain, since few of us would want to believe she actually was in favor of Iraq in her heart.

So, when she is luke warm to other issues, we see this same packaging all the more clearly.

So Hillary can't win for losing.

Can she pitch all this packaging aside and take some courageous stands, or is it too late? Would we just view this as another form of packaging if she did?