|
|
| |
| Wed, Aug. 20, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Is Hillary Clinton's star fading? Sunday, Sep 30, 2007 By David Sanders The aura of inevitability surrounding Hillary Clinton's White House candidacy isn't as bright as it once was. The vivid carrot-colored pant suit she sported while debating her Democratic opponents at Dartmouth College on Wednesday shined brighter than her candidacy, which has lost a bit of its luster as potential vulnerabilities have surfaced. Campaigns are narratives. They tell a story and, to a certain extent, Clinton has been able to direct her narrative by keeping Democrats focused on her electability. The danger that arises when a candidate rides that one-legged stool is that it is easy to topple. She hasn't fallen yet, but as the campaign wears on she will have to provide Democrats with more than she has provided so far. If not, she may find herself struggling to balance as her opponents and the press begin pushing and shoving. Case in point. A private memo leaked to The Washington Post, which came from Democratic pollster Celinda Lake's firm, indicated that recent polling of "31 swing congressional districts" revealed that Clinton's polarizing persona could cost her the 2008 election and could hurt other Democrats who might appear with her on the ballot. The memo provided details that seem to challenge one of the major prevailing assumptions from this early campaign. It indicated that Democrats faced a "sobering picture" that George W. Bush's abysmal ratings are not a guarantee that Democrats will take the White House. The advantage that Democrats enjoyed over Republicans in the generic ballot melted away when pollsters began naming specific candidates. In fact, Clinton and Barack Obama, her closest Democratic rival, trail Republican Rudy Giuliani in the districts polled by Lake Research. The news wasn't only that voters see Clinton as polarizing, but that Obama suffers from a "soft" image. When reporters asked Lake's firm to comment on the memo, it wouldn't. The firm said the poll wasn't leaked by them. Other news surfaced this week that was not good for Clinton, but this had more to do with her husband. The Wall Street Journal had a piece detailing former President Bill Clinton's involvement in a "messy" investment deal involving his personal aide Douglas Band, Yucaipa Cos., an investment firm Clinton has served as "a partner and senior advisor," and Raffaello Follieri, a glitzy 20-something Italian businessman who likes to turn his personal contacts into cash. The scheme that earned the Journal's focus was an apparent real estate deal where Follieri would purchase property from the Catholic Church, redevelop it and sell it for a hefty profit. Follieri used his contacts to get to Clinton and convinced the former president and his investment firm to invest up to $100 million in his "church-property venture." The young Italian made use of his relationship with Clinton by convincing some of the past president's supporters to take a position in his investment scheme. Things went south when it became apparent that things were not as Follieri has indicated. He is now the target of litigation. The lawsuit claims that he misappropriated "at least $1.3 million" while financing a "lavish lifestyle that included a Manhattan penthouse, five-star meals and private jets for Mr. Follieri and his girlfriend, actress Anne Hathaway." The story in no way points to any involvement from Sen. Clinton; however, it does underline some of the problems she will face as she tries to take partial credit for the "wonderful" things that her husband has done. She won't be able to take the good and leave the bad. His record, as well as hers, will quickly become the focus of this campaign and when it does; her one-legged stool may go a bit wobbly. ------- David Sanders writes twice weekly for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock and is a host of the Arkansas Education Television Network's "Unconventional Wisdom." His e-mail address is DavidJSanders@aol.com. |
