Memo to Hillary Clinton: ‘You’re the Problem’

Best bet for a third Clinton term is if she runs as the “Real Hillary”—warm, open, and honest.

TIM SLOAN/AFP/Getty Images
Ron Fournier
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Ron Fournier
Dec. 19, 2013, 9:53 a.m.

The fol­low­ing is a faux memo, al­though its con­tents are based upon my in­ter­views with people close to Hil­lary Clin­ton. They spoke on con­di­tion of an­onym­ity be­cause: a) Clin­ton has not de­cided wheth­er to run for pres­id­ent; b) she has not au­thor­ized any­body to talk about 2016 de­lib­er­a­tions; c) her friends, fam­ily, and ad­visers are still in the early stages of de­bat­ing strategies. This rep­res­ents one point of view.

To: Hil­lary

From: A Few of Us

Sub­ject: Anti-Hil­lary

The last we spoke as a group, you made it clear your mind wasn’t made up about 2016. We get it: You’re tired, and it’s too soon. And you’re right: By this time next year, you’ll know for cer­tain wheth­er you’ve got the fire in your belly, and we’ll be bet­ter able to judge voters’ at­ti­tudes to­ward a “third Clin­ton term.” (Sorry, we know you hate that phrase, but it makes a point.) Every­body on the team agrees you de­serve some space.

But a few of us felt com­pelled to jot down some “un­of­fi­cial” thoughts for you to di­gest dur­ing the hol­i­days. We’re a bit wor­ried about the nature of the team’s dis­cus­sions so far. What both­ers us is this: The talks are al­most ex­clus­ively tac­tic­al, tra­di­tion­al, and safe—based on a con­sensus that your brand is smartly po­si­tioned for 2016 and that you would be the pro­hib­it­ive fa­vor­ite. A few of us think dif­fer­ently. We think:

Buf­feted by jar­ring so­cial change, the Amer­ic­an pub­lic is dis­il­lu­sioned with:

  • Wash­ing­ton, es­pe­cially the grid­lock.
  • Polit­ics in gen­er­al, es­pe­cially the phoni­ness.  
  • In­sti­tu­tions, es­pe­cially the in­ef­fect­ive­ness.

As the 2016 elec­tion fast ap­proaches, most Amer­ic­ans in­tel­lec­tu­ally un­der­stand the im­port­ance of your ex­per­i­ence as first lady, sen­at­or, and sec­ret­ary of State. Your per­son­al ap­prov­al rat­ings are high­er than those of Pres­id­ent Obama. You should be proud. But, as you’ve heard us say, Amer­ic­ans make most of their de­cisions—from buy­ing homes and cars to de­cid­ing where to shop and how to vote—not with their heads, but with their guts. By that meas­ure, we’ve seen res­ults of psy­cho-so­cial sur­veys and of fo­cus groups that raise red flags.

Most Amer­ic­ans, in­clud­ing many of your sup­port­ers, con­sider you to be:

  • A creature of Wash­ing­ton.
  • In­tensely polit­ic­al (think of words like “cal­cu­lat­ing” and “am­bi­tious”).
  • An in­sti­tu­tion (and not just be­cause of your age. The Clin­ton fam­ily it­self is an in­sti­tu­tion, one freighted with bag­gage).

And so your biggest hurdle isn’t your age, the pres­id­ent’s re­cord, your hus­band, or even Benghazi/White­wa­ter, etc. It’s you, Hil­lary. You’re the prob­lem—that is, if you once again present your­self as an in­sti­tu­tion of Wash­ing­ton await­ing a polit­ic­al coron­a­tion. To win, you must be the anti-Hil­lary. You need to blast the pub­lic’s ca­ri­ca­ture of you to smithereens and re­place it with what we know as the Real Hil­lary.

In 2015-16, you must be:

  • Ac­cess­ible. Be a con­stant pres­ence on Twit­ter, Face­book, and oth­er so­cial me­dia (you, not your staff). Sur­round your­self all day with re­port­ers and pho­to­graph­ers. Ex­haust them with … you. Make John Mc­Cain’s “Straight Talk Ex­press” look like a buttoned-down op­er­a­tion. Op­er­ate with a flex­ible sched­ule that al­lows for off-the-cuff won­der­ful­ness.
  • Hon­est and Au­then­t­ic. Take tough stands and state them clearly. Make mis­takes and own up to them. As a mat­ter of fact, the only thing we should sched­ule for you every day is the “Daily Mis­take and Apo­logy.” We’re kid­ding … sort of.
  • Vul­ner­able. Re­mem­ber chok­ing up in New Hamp­shire? You looked hu­man. People like hu­mans. Don’t be afraid of look­ing tired or even grumpy; those are emo­tions that people can re­late to, if you ex­plain them. That horsey laugh of yours? Don’t hide it; you’re a funny, warm per­son. Let people see you. Be. Hil­lary.
  • Flex­ible. We live in a time of un­pre­ced­en­ted change, when in­sti­tu­tions ad­apt or per­ish. Be an in­sti­tu­tion that ad­apts. Be quick to change your strategy, your mes­sage, your staff (fire us first!) and, yes, even your hair­style. Tut-tut­ting be damned.
  • Small. People are tired of big in­sti­tu­tions. Travel light and run a lean op­er­a­tion. We’ve told people this for years but they don’t be­lieve us: While nobody feels a coun­try’s pain like your hus­band, you are bet­ter than Pres­id­ent Clin­ton in liv­ing rooms and at kit­chen tables. Far bet­ter. You are a mas­ter of the small talk and small ges­tures that still make a dif­fer­ence in polit­ics, es­pe­cially in states like Iowa and New Hamp­shire. Show them.
  • Com­pet­ent. This goes without say­ing, but that di­vided, plod­ding cam­paign op­er­a­tion you ran in 2008 didn’t work. It also sent a bad sig­nal to voters about how you might run their gov­ern­ment. A mod­el for your 2016 cam­paign would be (you’re go­ing to hate this) no-drama Obama. Also, your staff is one way to shat­ter the per­cep­tion that you’re a po­lar­izer. Hire a Re­pub­lic­an or two—ideally, people who worked for the Bush-Cheney White House and later (pub­licly) dis­owned the polit­ics of di­vi­sion. Sur­prise them.
  • Pop­u­list: Our de­tailed thoughts on your agenda will come in a sep­ar­ate memo but un­der­stand this: The next pres­id­ent of the United States (Demo­crat or Re­pub­lic­an) will be a pop­u­list. In­come dis­par­ity and de­clin­ing so­cial mo­bil­ity are clichés in Wash­ing­ton, but in the rest of Amer­ica, they are facts of life. Middle-class voters, es­pe­cially, are angry and scared, and they’re hungry for a lead­er who will carry them across that bridge built for the 21st cen­tury. Bor­row from pop­u­lists on the left (Eliza­beth War­ren’s at­tacks on Wall Street) and the right (Rand Paul’s at­tacks on NSA sur­veil­lance) to be the sin­gu­lar can­did­ate for our troubled times.

In ad­di­tion, you could play on voters’ dis­trust of gov­ern­ment by reach­ing back to the first Clin­ton White House (no­tice, we said “first”) for a ser­i­ous plat­form on “re­in­vent­ing gov­ern­ment.” What if, for ex­ample, you prom­ised to spend your first 100 days in of­fice fo­cused ex­clus­ively on mak­ing good pro­grams (read: Demo­crat­ic pro­grams) even bet­ter—say, Head Start and Obama­care? Im­pli­citly con­ced­ing that the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion dropped the ball on gov­ern­ing, you would earn back the pub­lic’s trust in gov­ern­ment be­fore launch­ing new ini­ti­at­ives. FDR did something like this be­fore launch­ing the New Deal. 

Pope Fran­cis has re­minded us of the power of small ges­tures. Without chan­ging the Vat­ic­an’s ideo­logy one iota, he has trans­formed the way people think about the Cath­ol­ic Church, one sym­bol­ic act at a time. And con­sider the par­al­lels between your job and that of the pope, an old man run­ning an an­cient in­sti­tu­tion marred by scan­dal and in­com­pet­ence. You can be just as trans­form­at­ive. Ac­tu­ally, if you run for pres­id­ent, you must be. That’s what a few of us think.

What We're Following See More »
ANOTHER NUCLEAR OPTION?
Byrd Rule Could Trip Up Health Legislation
53 minutes ago
THE DETAILS

"Even if House Republicans manage to get enough members of their party on board with the latest version of their health care bill, they will face another battle in the Senate: whether the bill complies with the chamber’s arcane ... Byrd rule, which stipulates all provisions in a reconciliation bill must affect federal spending and revenues in a way that is not merely incidental." Democrats should have the advantage in that fight, "unless the Senate pulls another 'nuclear option.'”

Source:
ONE WEEK
Senate Votes To Fund Government
1 days ago
BREAKING
ON TO SENATE
House Passes Spending Bill
1 days ago
BREAKING

The House has passed a one-week spending bill that will avert a government shutdown which was set to begin at midnight. Lawmakers now have an extra week to come to a longer agreement which is expected to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year in September. The legislation now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to pass before President Trump signs it.

PRESIDENT CALLS MEDICAID FUNDS A “BAILOUT”
Puerto Rico Another Sticking Point in Budget Talks
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

President Trump’s portrayal of an effort to funnel more Medicaid dollars to Puerto Rico as a "bailout" is complicating negotiations over a continuing resolution on the budget. "House Democrats are now requiring such assistance as a condition for supporting the continuing resolution," a position that the GOP leadership is amenable to. "But Mr. Trump’s apparent skepticism aligns him with conservative House Republicans inclined to view its request as a bailout, leaving the deal a narrow path to passage in Congress."

Source:
POTENTIAL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN?
Democrats Threaten Spending Bill Over Obamacare
2 days ago
BREAKING

Democrats in the House are threatening to shut down the government if Republicans expedite a vote on a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, said Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer Thursday. Lawmakers have introduced a one-week spending bill to give themselves an extra week to reach a long-term funding deal, which seemed poised to pass easily. However, the White House is pressuring House Republicans to take a vote on their Obamacare replacement Friday to give Trump a legislative victory, though it is still not clear that they have the necessary votes to pass the health care bill. This could go down to the wire.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login