The fight for the Presidency

HOW OBAMA UPSTAGED CLINTON

TODAY Weekend • May 31, 2008

“THE hardest thing about any political campaign,” an American statesman once said, “is how to win without proving that you are unworthy of winning”.

Senator Hillary Clinton is highly likely to fail to secure the Democratic nomination, not because she does not have what it takes to be president, but because she tried too hard and, in the eyes of voters, has became undeserving of the prize.

Even in a fiercely-competitive electoral system as the one in the United States, it seems, the electorate prefers that politicians not aspire to office but be called to serve. Or at least not aspire as aggressively and as misleadingly as Ms Clinton did. Her desire seemingly to win at any price may have cost her dear.

Claiming loudly she was “ready from day one” to be president, implying a sense of dynastic entitlement, jumping at any half chance to campaign negatively, embroidering her already-inflated foreign-policy resume with fanciful but untrue remarks about dodging bullets in Bosnia — these were among misjudgments inviting questions about her fitness to lead.

Mr Barack Obama, to be sure, did not wait around to be called. He saw a readiness for change among Americans and allowed the turning tide to sweep him ahead. Despite the many close encounters that could have damaged his reputation — the racially-charged disclosures about his pastor being the most serious — he emerged from the gruelling primary process less bruised than did Mrs Clinton.

When he wins his party’s presidential nomination soon, Mr Obama will have demonstrated an astute and intimate understanding of the public mood, and the superior skills — in campaign strategy and management, and fund-raising — to capitalise on that understanding and the opportunity it presented.

His accurate reading of the electorate’s longing for change turned out to be a major and fundamental advantage over Mrs Clinton’s brute-force approach. His message of a fresh start first proved authentically resonant in the Iowa caucuses and captured voters’ imagination in other early primaries.

It forced her on the defensive and to make tactical errors, starting with husband Bill’s discounting of Mr Obama’s victory as mere black demographic advantage in South Carolina that would translate poorly in white-dominant states.

As long as the war in Iraq was in the headlines — and it was, early in the primaries, with American fatalities closing on 4,000 — Ms Clinton could not make much of her vaunted experience. She had voted for the invasion. He had not. Worse, instead of apologising, she tried in vain to justify her stand.

Inexperience, though usually a liability, ironically did not undercut Mr Obama’s appeal. If anything, it might have helped his prospects among voters sick of the war and Washington politics as usual. His message of unity in diversity and new governance went down well with many waiting impatiently for the failed presidency of George W Bush to end.

Delivered in inclusive, sweeping and inspirational flourishes in oratory not heard since John F Kennedy, that vision appeared to have immunised him from Ms Clinton’s attacks. It won him support even as it freed him from having to go negative himself.

Ms Clinton, in the end, failed to bring to bear the competitive advantage that should have accrued from being a politically-active first lady of an effective and popular president, an outspoken two-term senator (compared toMr Obama’s single term) and an heir to her husband’s rich and powerful political network from which decisive favours could be called.

Instead, she floundered and flopped from one issue to another, fatally detracting from whatever overarching campaign theme she had hoped to register.

She became, ironically, a victim of her own preoccupation with policy details. Mastery of domestic issues — perhaps advantageous as the economy suffered through the sub-prime mortgage crisis and sky-rocketing fuel prices — turned out to be less consequential as attention remained on the larger questions Mr Obama evoked.

With her inability to paint in broad strokes what a new Clinton presidency would be like, Mr Obama deftly suggested the worst — a Democratic continuation of the same old Republican divisiveness and, to boot, reappearance of some of the more unappetising attributes of the two previous Clinton terms.

Mr Obama also expertly controlled his surf board on the popular wave, exploiting momentum among groups that remained hitherto untapped — young people and independent voters, for example. He outclassed Mrs Clinton in demographics-driven strategy. Apparently more familiar than Clinton workers with party campaign rules, his team won votes and delegates in caucuses and small states that the Clinton campaign neglected.

Unlike Mrs Clinton, he appeared to have taken little for granted. Many states saw campaign offices opening at the grassroots level, some for the first time.

Obama campaign workers surprised and impressed many locals as they canvassed in small towns. The hard work paid off, winning him delegates that established his lead.

The extensive scope and nimble execution of his campaign won praise as an indication of his planning and management ability. In contrast,Ms Clinton’s team evidently did not plan beyond Super Tuesday on Feb 5, confident she would have wrapped up the process by then. Concentrating on the big states, they left the rest of the field open to Mr Obama. It was the Aesop hare-and-tortoise fable.

The slow-and-steady Obama strategy has a parallel in small and steady fund-raising. Long after the primaries, I’m sure I’ll continue receiving email asking for US$25 contributions.

His website was the only one among the several I contacted last year — both Democratic and Republican — that bothered to send me appeals and updates. After an acknowledgement, the Clinton team was completely silent. She was going after donors giving the individual maximum of US$2,500.

Ms Clinton blew most of her funds on the early primaries and had to lend her own money to her campaign. While debts mounted and her campaign had to stint on advertising, Mr Obama goes into the general election with more money than the presumptive Republican nominee John McCain.

The race has taken a long time, but it is clear Mr Obama has not proved himself unworthy of winning.

Kenneth S Chiang is a veteran freelance writer based in the United States.