Where Hillary Clinton Is Most in Her Element

At Georgetown, Clinton could speak freely about women’s economic inequality without fear of immediate reprisal.

Oct. 30, 2014, 11:37 a.m.

Hil­lary Clin­ton doesn’t want to talk about polit­ics, and that’s per­fectly fine—for now.

Speak­ing at Geor­getown Uni­versity on Thursday, Clin­ton ad­dressed wo­men’s eco­nom­ic em­power­ment.

She told a story about a trip she made to In­dia with a group of eco­nom­ists. Clin­ton said she no­ticed many wo­men were work­ing in the street mar­kets or haul­ing wa­ter.

“How do you eval­u­ate wo­men’s con­tri­bu­tions to the eco­nomy?” she re­called ask­ing. One eco­nom­ist re­spon­ded that they didn’t be­cause wo­men don’t par­ti­cip­ate in the form­al eco­nomy.

“What would hap­pen if wo­men stopped work­ing in the in­form­al eco­nomy?” Clin­ton asked, and sug­ges­ted that the eco­nomy would screech to a halt.

“Well, yes, that is a point,” the eco­nom­ist replied. The Geor­getown audi­ence laughed at the an­ec­dote.

The an­ec­dote dove­tails nicely with Clin­ton’s semi-new stump-speech thes­is: that by em­power­ing wo­men across the eco­nom­ic spec­trum, the world suc­ceeds.

It’s an ar­gu­ment echoed in her speeches for fe­male can­did­ates like Martha Coakley, Jeanne Shaheen, Staci Ap­pel, and Mary Burke. At an event for Coakley on Monday, Clin­ton made an eco­nom­ic ob­ser­va­tion that got her in some trouble.

“Don’t let any­body tell you it’s cor­por­a­tions and busi­nesses that cre­ate jobs,” she said. “You know that old the­ory—trickle-down eco­nom­ics. That has been tried; that has failed. It has failed rather spec­tac­u­larly.”

Re­pub­lic­ans like Sen. Rand Paul quickly seized upon the com­ment, link­ing it to Pres­id­ent Obama’s much-de­rided “you didn’t build that” com­ment from 2012.

“Hil­lary Clin­ton says, ‘Well, busi­nesses don’t cre­ate jobs,’” Paul told a crowd in Kan­sas on Tues­day. “Any­body be­lieve that?” The crowd roared its dis­agree­ment.

But back at Geor­getown, speak­ing to a wo­men’s eco­nom­ic for­um, Hil­lary Clin­ton is ab­so­lutely in her ele­ment, her pub­lic safe space. Even at the Demo­crat­ic Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee Wo­men’s Lead­er­ship For­um, Clin­ton’s per­form­ance soun­ded more like a paid ad­vert­ise­ment for the Demo­crat­ic Party than a speech she truly cared about. At Geor­getown, she could be as prag­mat­ic and pro­fess­or­i­al as she wanted.

This is not to say she’s avoid­ing the plebs as she seeks their polit­ic­al fa­vor. Ruby Cramer re­ports that while vis­it­ing Iowa on Wed­nes­day, Clin­ton worked the crowds, “call­ing out in­di­vidu­al [Bruce] Bra­ley vo­lun­teers by name to thank them, mak­ing time for an un­an­nounced stop at a res­taur­ant in Iowa City, and jok­ing about that spe­cial kind of de­vo­tion to pres­id­en­tial polit­ics for which the early-vot­ing state is known.”

As one of the most fam­ous politi­cians in the coun­try, it’s dif­fi­cult to not be­come isol­ated from main­stream Amer­ic­an life. It’s easy to seek solitude at the Con­gres­sion­al Coun­try Club, as Newt and Cal­lista Gin­grich of­ten do, or simply re­main on your ranch and paint por­traits of your dog. It would be so easy for Hil­lary Clin­ton to simply sink in­to the jac­uzzi of lib­er­al in­tel­lec­tu­al­ism, lead­ing mi­cro-fin­ance pro­grams in third-world coun­tries and giv­ing com­mence­ment speeches when she wants to. But no mat­ter how un­com­fort­able Clin­ton may be with the glad-hand­ing, eat­ing at diners in Iowa, and pre­tend­ing to care about loc­al uni­ons, she’s not go­ing to settle for an easy re­tire­ment.

After her Geor­getown speech ended, Clin­ton was hustled out the door to a cam­paign event for An­thony Brown, a Demo­crat run­ning for gov­ernor of Mary­land. If Clin­ton and her fel­low Demo­crats only had to per­suade lib­er­al in­tel­lec­tu­als at elite coastal uni­versit­ies to vote for them, they’d have noth­ing to worry about come Tues­day. As it stands, the midterm cam­paign trail is not such a safe space.

What We're Following See More »
Trump Signs Border Deal
1 days ago

"President Trump signed a sweeping spending bill Friday afternoon, averting another partial government shutdown. The action came after Trump had declared a national emergency in a move designed to circumvent Congress and build additional barriers at the southern border, where he said the United States faces 'an invasion of our country.'"

Trump Declares National Emergency
2 days ago

"President Donald Trump on Friday declared a state of emergency on the southern border and immediately direct $8 billion to construct or repair as many as 234 miles of a border barrier. The move — which is sure to invite vigorous legal challenges from activists and government officials — comes after Trump failed to get the $5.7 billion he was seeking from lawmakers. Instead, Trump agreed to sign a deal that included just $1.375 for border security."

House Will Condemn Emergency Declaration
2 days ago

"House Democrats are gearing up to pass a joint resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency declaration to build his U.S.-Mexico border wall, a move that will force Senate Republicans to vote on a contentious issue that divides their party. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday evening in an interview with The Washington Post that the House would take up the resolution in the coming days or weeks. The measure is expected to easily clear the Democratic-led House, and because it would be privileged, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would be forced to put the resolution to a vote that he could lose."

Where Will the Emergency Money Come From?
2 days ago

"ABC News has learned the president plans to announce on Friday his intention to spend about $8 billion on the border wall with a mix of spending from Congressional appropriations approved Thursday night, executive action and an emergency declaration. A senior White House official familiar with the plan told ABC News that $1.375 billion would come from the spending bill Congress passed Thursday; $600 million would come from the Treasury Department's drug forfeiture fund; $2.5 billion would come from the Pentagon's drug interdiction program; and through an emergency declaration: $3.5 billion from the Pentagon's military construction budget."

House Passes Funding Deal
2 days ago

"The House passed a massive border and budget bill that would avert a shutdown and keep the government funded through the end of September. The Senate passed the measure earlier Thursday. The bill provides $1.375 billion for fences, far short of the $5.7 billion President Trump had demanded to fund steel walls. But the president says he will sign the legislation, and instead seek to fund his border wall by declaring a national emergency."


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.