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.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at the first annual Richard C. Holbrooke lecture at the State Department in Washington, DC.
TIM SLOAN/AFP/Getty Images
Ron Fournier
Add to Briefcase
Ron Fournier
Dec. 19, 2013, midnight

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 »
SAYS HIS DEATH STEMMED FROM A FISTFIGHT
Saudis Admit Khashoggi Killed in Embassy
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"Saudi Arabia said Saturday that Jamal Khashoggi, the dissident Saudi journalist who disappeared more than two weeks ago, had died after an argument and fistfight with unidentified men inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. Eighteen men have been arrested and are being investigated in the case, Saudi state-run media reported without identifying any of them. State media also reported that Maj. Gen. Ahmed al-Assiri, the deputy director of Saudi intelligence, and other high-ranking intelligence officials had been dismissed."

Source:
ROGER STONE IN THE CROSSHAIRS?
Mueller Looking into Ties Between WikiLeaks, Conservative Groups
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation is scrutinizing how a collection of activists and pundits intersected with WikiLeaks, the website that U.S. officials say was the primary conduit for publishing materials stolen by Russia, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Mueller’s team has recently questioned witnesses about the activities of longtime Trump confidante Roger Stone, including his contacts with WikiLeaks, and has obtained telephone records, according to the people familiar with the matter."

Source:
PROBING COLLUSION AND OBSTRUCTION
Mueller To Release Key Findings After Midterms
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to issue findings on core aspects of his Russia probe soon after the November midterm elections ... Specifically, Mueller is close to rendering judgment on two of the most explosive aspects of his inquiry: whether there were clear incidents of collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, and whether the president took any actions that constitute obstruction of justice." Mueller has faced pressure to wrap up the investigation from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, said an official, who would receive the results of the investigation and have "some discretion in deciding what is relayed to Congress and what is publicly released," if he remains at his post.

Source:
PASSED ON SO-CALLED "SAR" REPORTS
FinCen Official Charged with Leaking Info on Manafort, Gates
2 days ago
THE DETAILS
"A senior official working for the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has been charged with leaking confidential financial reports on former Trump campaign advisers Paul Manafort, Richard Gates and others to a media outlet. Prosecutors say that Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, a senior adviser to FinCEN, photographed what are called suspicious activity reports, or SARs, and other sensitive government files and sent them to an unnamed reporter, in violation of U.S. law."
Source:
FIRST CHARGE FOR MIDTERMS
DOJ Charges Russian For Meddling In 2018 Midterms
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"The Justice Department on Friday charged a Russian woman for her alleged role in a conspiracy to interfere with the 2018 U.S. election, marking the first criminal case prosecutors have brought against a foreign national for interfering in the upcoming midterms. Elena Khusyaynova, 44, was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Prosecutors said she managed the finances of 'Project Lakhta,' a foreign influence operation they said was designed 'to sow discord in the U.S. political system' by pushing arguments and misinformation online about a host of divisive political issues, including immigration, the Confederate flag, gun control and the National Football League national-anthem protests."

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