Clinton Returns To Readiness Argument
After recovering from her Philly debate performance with a steadier night in Nevada last week, and then refusing to swing at a pitch in the dirt from Bob Novak intended to get her and Obama into an empty tussle, Hillary has returned to some effective messaging while Obama makes a curious new argument for his candidacy.
Clinton today resumed her earlier “I can take charge immediately without on-the-job training” argument, but she added a new wrinkle and punch line. Sensing correctly that economic insecurity may be just as important to voters next year as national security, Clinton said that she is the most able to deal quickly with the economic challenges Bush will leave behind, and added:
"There seems to be a pattern here. It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush," she said to applause.
Clinton also swatted Obama once again for even bringing up Social Security in the first place.
"We don't need more Republican scare tactics about a 'Social Security crisis,'" Clinton said. "And we don't need a trillion-dollar tax increase that will hit families already facing higher energy, health care and college costs. What we need is to focus on the real crises of health care and Medicare, and on expanding opportunities for poor, working and middle class families who are struggling now."Her critics on both sides of the aisle say that she isn’t authentic because she won’t say what she believes in. In response, Hillary should start talking directly about moving away from a Wall Street economy back to a Main Street one, where the concerns of everyday Americans carry more weight than those of multinational CEOs and campaign contributors. She is already wisely confronting her vulnerabilities. And she can get the jump on her rivals by pointing out that the military has done its job so well in Iraq that the Guard can be brought home now while we gradually redeploy ground forces out of Iraq towards establishing a regional security and counter-terrorism presence.
For his part today, Obama decided to roll out the message that because he lived overseas for four years as a child, he understands foreign cultures and therefore has better foreign policy judgment than his peers. I’m not sure that message will play in many parts of this country, especially in red state America.