Posted on 05/24/2006 12:24:18 AM PDT by MadIvan
Hillary Clinton may be the Democratic front-runner for the presidency but she seems to have a lot to learn about campaigning for the White House.
In a weighty speech to journalists at the National Press Club in Washington yesterday, the senator squandered an opportunity to shine before a critically important audience - the journalists who will present her to the public if, as expected, she declares her candidacy for the 2008 nomination.
It began well enough. Resplendent in a lemon yellow two-piece and expensively bejewelled, her star power was plain the moment she entered the room. Everywhere, necks craned for a sight of the immaculately coiffured New York senator.
But then she lost it. The half-hour speech was achingly dull, a meandering lecture on energy policy which left the audience stifling yawns.
It was hard not to recall the charisma of her husband, Bill, the former president, and Mrs Clinton seemed to sense things had not gone well.
As she droned towards the finish, she looked out at a silent, glassy-eyed audience and acknowledged that her speech was a little unusual. "I know this is probably more wonkish than many of you had anticipated," she said, moments after offering her plans for something called geologic carbon sequestration. "But I feel very strongly about it."
There was a murmur of laughter but only minutes earlier some of those at the breakfast meeting appeared to have slumped into unconsciousness.
Others stifled yawns, held their chins in their hands or stared at the carpet or ceiling. By the time two women peace protesters made their predictable intervention on Iraq (and were predictably carried out by Mrs Clinton's burly secret servicemen) the assembled journalists had largely stopped listening.
The melee did at least open the way for questions. Mrs Clinton was asked: "You're here to talk about energy, but most people are here because they think you will run for president." She affected surprise before offering a cautious and well-rehearsed answer, claiming that she didn't think about such things.
However preposterous her response (she has raised more than £10 million for a senate re-election battle which will cost far less), there was a respectful silence. But everyone laughed when she was asked what she would like to be remembered for if her career ended now. "I don't want it to end now," she said.
That sort of ambiguity feeds America's fascination with Mrs Clinton.
Yesterday a 2,000-word examination of the Clinton marriage in the New York Times, produced no firm conclusion other than Mr Clinton remained by far the better public performer while she was "starchy". Her performance yesterday did nothing to overturn that notion.
Oh?
Thought the two-piece this person was raving over meant a dress-type thing.
So she's still in pantsuits, eh.
What is this? Sounds like drilling for oil.
I watched a bit of her speech on CSPIN......when she mentioned the need for wind power I had to snicker. A little jab at Kerry.
The Smartest Woman In The World should not have to resort to buzzwords.
Her voice is like a dull screech of chalk on a blackboard.
I think most any personable Republican can beat her.
A forensic team is already following hillary, ready to dissect her campaign when it dies in early 2007.
Did you vote here: http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=149
Did she simply say "wind power", or was it something more like "opportunistic atmosperphic flux capture"?
moments after offering her plans for something called geologic carbon sequestration. "But I feel very strongly about it whatever the Hell it is?."
Had to change the channel. Can only take so much of her voice.
Yes, I did vote in that poll.
I pray Gore and Kerry give it another run...
All she needs she already has...which is ABC,CBS,NBC,PBS,NPR,CNN,MSNBC,CURRENT,NY Times,Washington Post, LA Times, Miami Herald,USA TODAY etc...
Can we start the rumor that Hillary is a dull-do?
Thanks!
Well, the reporter wasn't impressed with the "weighty speech" that was to present her views to the public. There was virtually no real reporting on what her speech was about. Was that because they didn't know what the heck she was talking about either?
Didn't Kerry get 58 million votes last time? And, Gore got more than Bush. I'd rather someone run who will get LESS, not more, votes ; )
Makes sense when you think about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.