Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Iowa: Hillary Looks Shaky in a Pivotal Contest

By Matt Taibbi, RollingStone.com. Posted December 10, 2007.


After months as the front-runner, Hillary Clinton suddenly finds herself in a three-way heat.
Advertisement

Iowa is not like other states. There's fuck-all to do here, and unless you just love dirt or barnyard sex, you could easily die of boredom -- except in an election year, when suddenly you become the center of the universe. Iowa political events sometimes seem like meetings of Athenian elders; every last audience member seems to have read the text of the Military Commissions Act, and even the best-prepared candidates come out of town-hall meetings looking harried and tested. And these days, the candidate who looks the worst for wear in Iowa is Hillary Clinton.

Here's how bad it's gotten for Hillary of late: Rival candidates are literally tripping over each other in an effort to knock her wobbling campaign off its pedestal. For the first time since this race began, three major candidates are in a three-way tie at the top of the Iowa polls. A primary season that looked like a prolonged slam-dunk coronation a month ago has morphed into a scene from the Spike TV classic Predator, with her seven pursuers fingering the green blood on the ground and whispering with a weary smile about the once-invincible monster:

If it bleeds, we can kill it.

It's Wednesday afternoon in a public library in Monticello, Iowa, a windy little two-saloon town south of Dubuque, and the foxily dressed Michelle Obama ("Jimmy Choos," she says, pointing to her sleek brown boots; they stand out like a set of Ferrari headlights in this room full of bundled-up farm-town housewives) is about to read a story to a bunch of local kiddies. What elevates the event beyond the standard issue campaign-wife-with-kids schtick is what's happening downstairs, on the floor of the library directly below Obama: There, a crowd of clean-cut twenty-somethings almost identical in appearance to the Obama team is setting up a meeting room for a campaign appearance by John Edwards. The way it's being arranged, Edwards will be exactly underneath Michelle Obama when he takes the mike. Only in the stretch run before the all-important Iowa caucus can two presidential campaigns land on the exact same geographical pinpoint on the vast planet Earth at exactly the same moment, entirely by accident. The whole state is like a supercharged game of political Battleship.

"It's crazy," says Newsweek's Holly Bailey, who is seated next to me at the Edwards deal. "I show up here to follow Edwards, go upstairs to charge up my computer. Next thing you know, I'm staring at Michelle Obama."

Not only are the Democratic hopefuls crawling all over Iowa, nearly all of them are pimping the same message. In the wake of a nearly catastrophic two-week run in the Hillary Clinton campaign -- a period that saw the stone-faced former first lady rocked by a series of spastic missteps just shy of "Dean Scream" magnitude -- the campaigns of John Edwards, Barack Obama and the other Democrats are each attacking a different recently exposed flank of the Hillary Express.

You can clearly see that dynamic at work in the Monticello logjam. Upstairs, in her thirteenth visit to this state, Michelle Obama is playing the same game her husband has been playing of late -- hammering Hillary without mentioning her by name. She refers pointedly to politicians who voted to support Bush's invasion of Iraq: "There were a lot of people with a lot of experience," she says, "who marched right behind that drum."

The reference isn't lost on anyone. "Yeah, I caught that," says Molly Pisarik, an Iowa voter sitting in the audience. "Obviously she's talking about Hillary."

Downstairs, John Edwards is being even more explicit. After whipping the crowd into a frenzy with an impassioned speech blasting the influence of lobbyists and corporate campaign contributors, he turns the gun on his own party. "The presidential candidate who has raised the most money from Washington lobbyists is not a Republican," he says. "The candidate who has raised the most money from insurance companies isn't a Republican. The presidential candidate who has raised the most money from defense contractors isn't a Republican."

He pauses, then smiles. "The answer to all those questions, you probably already know, is Hillary Clinton," he says.

This scene in Monticello takes place exactly fifty days before the January 3rd Iowa caucus, which means we've entered the white-hot weeks of the primary season. In a presidential campaign dominated almost from start to finish by gobs of corporate money, a captive commercial media and reams of computer-generated rhetorical bullshit, the frenzied stretch run in this tiny first caucus is one of the last bastions of real democracy left in the process; it's a state so small and so rife with opportunities for intimate politician-voter communication that even the richest and most powerful front-runner can't cruise to victory on endorsements and name-recognition alone.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: barack obama, hillary clinton, john edwards, election 2008

Matt Taibbi is a writer for Rolling Stone.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Bill Richardson
Posted by: kgs1947 on Dec 10, 2007 3:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think more attention needs to be focused on Bill Richardson as a viable candidate!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bill Richardson Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Bill Richardson Posted by: carlon
» RE: Bill Richardson Posted by: truegreencore
How does Hilllary explain that....?
Posted by: johnp on Dec 10, 2007 3:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The way Hillary explains it is by reference to the remarks of baboons like you, that are out the get the First Lady. We all know that media have been anxious to dethrone her, and your tediously long essay is simply another example of something most activist democrats foresaw. You're either a republican, or a very dumb democrat. If you succeed in knocking Hillary out of the game, the net result will be that who ever remains standing will be vastly easier prey for the republicans. How can you fail to see this? It's not possible, unless you're even more dimwitted that I thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WRONG! Posted by: Eat Politicians
If you can't find "fuck-all" to do in Iowa...
Posted by: Wexler on Dec 10, 2007 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... then I suppose the best question to ask, Matt, is what the fuck did you want to do? Fuck all? I'm sure you might be able to get that done if you knew where to look. BTW, I personally appreciate any ink you can give Iowa that makes us look like provincial hicks, because with your help, perhaps we might be able to stave off the invasion of fucking know-it-all assholes who are so obviously superior to us for a bit longer. So keep it up, we're all about pig shit and ball caps that have brands of corn seed on them. Thanks in advance.

My wife and I are precinct captains for Barack Obama's campaign, and I've actually been on the telephone speaking with people who are actually going to caucus on January 3. Guess what? Hillary is going to lose Iowa, and she's going to lose it badly. People I have spoken with don't even mention her as a 3rd choice, let alone a 2nd choice. Her problem with Iowa Dems is that she is perceived to represent a continuation of Bush's policies and "business as usual". Whether or not that's a fair rap, it's the perception.

So anyway, Matt, next time you're in the Cedar Rapids-Iowa City area, send me an email and we'll go out on the town. But you have to promise not to tell.

-Wexler

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:Lol, great comments Wexler. Posted by: Techubus
Not to worry
Posted by: tkwilson on Dec 10, 2007 5:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There should be plenty undercover Repugs salting the caucuses in Hillarys favor since running against her is the only chance most of the Rethug candidates have of winning.

Hillary, and most of the other candidates on both sides are whores of the corporate machine. Anybody the MSM puts on top should be automatically suspect. The candidate with the most corporate money is the dirtiest. Shame on you if you're stupid enough to vote for her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not to worry Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» RE: Not to worry Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Whoa...Not to worry! Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Two Party System
Posted by: frank69 on Dec 10, 2007 7:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are we saying the People Party is going to win in Iowa? Well, how about the rest of the nation? I cannot foresee the People Party defeating the Money Party in the long run. If you read electoral history, the Money party always wins!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Two Party System Posted by: VZEQICVA
» Well, gee... Posted by: greenman
All I Want For Christmas
Posted by: NoPCZone on Dec 10, 2007 9:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is for the Clinton Campaign to melt down and be forever gone from American politics. And a 4th place finish in Iowa & New Hampshire. That would make it a really Happy New Year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: All I Want For Christmas Posted by: truegreencore
tigesgirl
Posted by: tigesgirl on Dec 10, 2007 12:40 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are not nice to and you underestimate the honesty and experience of Joe Biden. Unlike Obama--who inspires some as a preacher does, but who has little content in his speeches and less experience than is acceptable at this critical time in our history--Biden has always stood for his principles, and his principle are sound. Indeed, you really do a disservice to Biden, Richardson, and Dodd, who are all more qualified and appealing than the three you talk about. We in the next round of states want a chance to vote for a person with the human rights, anti-crime, pro-women legislation record and stellar foreign policy knowledge and experience that Joe Biden has.
I commend him to all Iowans who will caucus and voters in New Hampshire as the right person for the presidency in 2008.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Biden says the wrong thing Posted by: rjgwood
My Turn To Shill For Edwards
Posted by: dustinblythe on Dec 10, 2007 1:17 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all of the Obama vs. Clinton talk in the media it is sometimes easy to overlook the candidate that can pick up the pieces and take Iowa: John Edwards. Let us not forget that Edwards is well known in Iowa (especially if you include the time he spent there four years ago), has been very open and forthright on the issues and has a good organization of his own. When it comes to progressive issues, and electability, John Edwards may be the choice of a majority of Iowans and the surprise of 2008.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Anti-Hillary Sentiment
Posted by: truegreencore on Dec 10, 2007 4:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author provides a somewhat misleading description of the Caucus process. As an Iowan, perhaps I can clarify.

"The way this deal works is that on caucus night, meetings are held in each of the state's ninety-nine counties to divide all the caucusgoers into groups supporting this or that candidate."

Actually, people gather at the precinct level -much smaller than counties.

There is also very little attention being paid to the anti-Hillary sentiment. The fact that Hillary is being targeted by two very strong challengers is very bad news for her. Because precincts are distributing a set number of delegates, there are very strategic moves to be made to harm an opponent.

Let me provide an example. In my precinct, there are 5 delegates. I'm assuming in my district (based on lawn signs and parade turn-out, etc.) that Clinton, Edwards, Obama, and Richardson will earn a delegate. The fight, then, is over the remaining delegate. If Hillary is close to earning the last delegate, one can expect Obama and Edwards to make a fifth candidate viable, such as Biden or even Kucinich (or in other precincts, Richardson will definitely beneit, as he will be most often the candidate closest to viability). This, in effect, deprives Clinton of earning more delegates, keeping the statewide contest closer for candidates who are not expected to do as well (Edwards) and potentially running up the score for Obama (currently leading in polls).

Of course, the strategic maneuverings work both way, but Obama has a very strong second-choice support throughout the state, and his unfavorables aren't anywhere near as bad as Hillary's. In other words, the strategic voting is less likely to harm other candidates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Anti-Hillary Sentiment Posted by: Wexler
The single compelling
Posted by: herbal on Dec 11, 2007 3:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
issue of the campaign is the corporate sponsorship and the Israeli sponsorship of Mid East war. Nothing so exposes Hillary Clinton's bankrupt candidacy better than her famous "leave no options off the table" call to nuke Iran that can be seen by googling 'Hillary Clinton AIPAC" on U Tube. Then compare this rhetoric with the virtually identical speech of the Christian Zionist cult radio preacher, 'Rev. Hagge AIPAC'. Turn your people on to Hillary the Hawk.

The candidate who has done more than any other in fingering the dominance of Congress and public policy by multi-national corporations is John Edwards. Even Kucinich and Gravel don't go as far. They all would be well advised to follow Edward's lead. The electorate does not care who wins so much as the educational value of the campaign that falls out for combatting the neo-fascism that has gained a strangle hold on our Republic. Together, less stealth Republican hawks, Hillary and Biden, the Democrats have the opportunity to get some inertia going to reverse the anti-Christ tide of corporatism. Progressives, don't blow it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"He's ready to be as full of shit as it takes to win the White House"
Posted by: kelt65 on Dec 11, 2007 4:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well said ...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This guy is a Reporter?
Posted by: gary_7vn on Dec 14, 2007 11:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What's left of the free press in america long ago gave up objectivity. But at least most of them still try to get "facts" right. Taibbi the 9/11 truth denying swine that he is, describes the HRC "flag incident" for us. "...getting entangled with four American flags, Chevy Chase-style, as she tried to leave the stage following a Veterans Day campaign stop. "I think that the bases are not weighted," Hillary screeched as she frantically tried to right the toppling flags."

Problem is, for our "reporter" is that the so called incident is on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VvOqUvvO9Y

Even an self promoting sleezebag like tab can't deny that she was not "screeching" but was in fact speaking very calmly, as you can see in video was not at all "frantic". He even got the quote wrong, the sentence ends with "properly". She did not look particularly "entangled" to me either. Does this guy need glasses?

If tabbby gets something this simple wrong, something that he could watch over and over on youtube - what chance does he have getting the rest of the details right?

No wonder that this arrogant monkey is a shill for the permanent government and their lies about 9/11.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Clinton Connection
Posted by: angelofdeath on Dec 14, 2007 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THE TORRES-VIGNALI CONNECTION is explored in detail in a congressional report that resulted from Pardongate, when revelations surfaced that President Clinton granted clemency for Carlos Vignali Jr. — convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 15 years in federal prison in 1995 — along with other convicted criminals and one-time international fugitive Marc Rich. The granting of clemency occurred after payments were made to Clinton’s brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham, the brother of former first lady, New York state senator and 2008 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.


Released in March 2002 by the congressional Committee on Government Reform, “Justice Undone: Clemency Decisions in the Clinton White House” details Hugh Rodham’s involvement in the Vignali affair, as well as the long business history Vignali once shared with George Torres.

The report takes to task top L.A. elected officials, including county Supervisor Gloria Molina, then–state Senator Richard Polanco, then–state Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa and U.S. Representative Xavier Becerra, among others, for lobbying on behalf of Vignali Jr., in light of his drug conviction and the fact that DEA agents long suspected Vignali Sr. to be involved in drug trafficking — along with Torres. While a member of the California state Assembly, Villaraigosa wrote the first letter on Vignali’s behalf on May 24, 1996.


Saying Hillary Rodham Clinton was a leader who offered a new path, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa today formally endorsed the New York senator and former first lady in her race to become president of the United States.

Villaraigosa will also serve as one of the four national chairs of Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic nomination for president, it was announced.

At a televised news conference from the UCLA campus in Westwood, Villaraigosa praised Clinton’s approach to domestic issues, particularly education, and her pledge to help end the war in Iraq. The pair earlier toured the preschool at UCLA’s Krieger Center. — La Times

http://mayorvillaraigosasdemons.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]