Hillary’s Presidential Campaign Legacy

Though the Democratic nomination is expected to go to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton left a mark on the 2008 presidential campaign that will be remembered in elections to come.  Whether or not gender had anything to do with her failure to receive the Democratic nod, she will be remembered as the first woman to get as far as she did. 

I had no intention of voting for Hillary Clinton, but I did feel a tug at my typically unemotional heartstrings when she exited the race.   I am no feminist, but there is something to be said for a woman who gets as far as she did in a man’s game.  Hindsight of course gives us the benefit of analyzing her missteps. 

As I questioned before, was her campaign technologically challenged? 

She cried – not once…

but twice…

 

She cackled…

 

She sat down with Bill O’Reilly…

Chelsea said that Hillary would make a better president than Bill…

Leaving hindsight behind, some speculate that she’s prepping for 2012.  That move wouldn’t surprise many – the Clintons are notorious for their planning, organization and ability to get what they want.

Despite what is going on behind the scenes with the Clinton campaign, she has decided to put the party first.  Not that she had a choice, but she has put her full support behind Obama.

Though there are dissenters, her supporters are largely following suit.  For example, Emily’s List, an organization “dedicated to building a progressive America by electing pro-choice Democratic women to office,” has now pledged its support to Obama. 

Where does Hillary go from here?  Maybe she’ll be Obama’s Vice Presidential choice.  Maybe she’ll choose to remain in the Senate.  But, like it or not, she’s has done the right thing for the party by endorsing Obama.   She really didn’t have a choice, especially if she plans to run again later.  She had to endorse Obama – for the party and for herself.  But I think that her legacy will be that she kept her chin up and did the right thing – for the Democratic party.  The rest is just speculation.  I’m also speculating that we haven’t seen the last of Hillary vying for the White House.

Obama: Leading the Char… Wait, What?

A presidential candidate is going to Iraq – finally!  Just when you thought the candidates had forgotten the wars in the Middle East, Obama steps up and paves the way.  He’s such a leader.

 

 

Of course, we forget that McCain went in March. 

 

 

McCain’s trip received little fanfare, and he didn’t have the bragging rights of all three network anchors in tow.   In fact, John McCain has taken three foreign trips in the last few months, and not one included a network anchor.  In March, he traveled to Britain, France and Israel.  NBC and ABC sent correspondents.  CBS sent no one. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer even managed to turn this trip into a taxpayer-funded issue.  His trip to Canada in June was not covered at all by the evening newscasts, and very little coverage was given to his trip to Colombia and Mexico a few weeks ago.

 

 

Obama has not been to Iraq since 2006 and has never been to Afghanistan.  This lack of direct knowledge of the situation has, so far, qualified him to push for an immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq should he become president.  I presume Obama’s trip is as equally political as it is legitimate, but that’s no surprise at this point.

 

Media Research Center reports:

 

“During the week of March 16, McCain’s trip received only four full-length stories during the combined ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news program coverage. Three of those stories were on NBC’s “Nightly News,” one of which focused on McCain’s mistaken comment about Iran funding Al Qaeda in Iraq. ABC’s “World News” did only one full-length story on McCain’s Iraq trip, which mentioned the gaffe. The CBS “Evening News” was by far the worst, devoting only 31 words, a grand total of 10 seconds, to the Republican nominee’s Iraq visit during the entire week of evening news coverage.”

 

Even the Daily Kos acknowledges “Obamamania.”  But, get this, they say that McCain is getting less coverage because the press likes him more than Obama.  You read that correctly.  Daily Kos believes that Obama increases ratings in a way that McCain doesn’t, and that’s why he’s the media superstar.  “Media people,” they claim, “hate it.  But they follow what sells.” 

 

So it’s really the viewers who determine coverage, not network heads with a personal interest in politics.  Right.

Cyrus Krohn & GOP.com

I think the main difference between the Democrat’s online platform and the Republican’s online platform is that the Dems have done it, well, better.  They started earlier with their online endeavors.  Their constituents embraced the technological involvement of the 2008 Presidential race.  Certain Republicans did too – Ron Paul’s backers rallied tremendously online – but overall, their efforts were far less commendable.

Cyrus Krohn has a huge responsibility with GOP.com.  Where do the Republicans go technologically if McCain doesn’t win in November?  GOP.com is definitely a step in the right direction for the Republicans, one that, win or lose, needs to be continually advanced. 

But a few criticisms, if I might…

First, the site takes forever to load (as do other links when I clicked on them), which is an unnecessary frustration.  Those valuable few seconds give me the opportunity to type a different address into my browser and be on my way.  If I want to join the GOP, make a donation to the cause or read some dish about an opponent, don’t give me an excuse not to by taking too long to load the page.

At any given time, visitors might think this is an Obama Web site at first glance: 

null

Give opponents their due, but chances are that people who visit this site are voting for McCain to begin with.  Obama information is absolutely necessary, but it doesn’t have to be front and center. 

Finding the donation application widget took me two days, four phone calls and an email.  Turns out that the widget isn’t even part of GOP.com – it’s part of meetbarackobama.com, one of the RNC’s other sites that’s linked-to from the GOP.com homepage.  Confused yet?  I would suggest making this much easier to find or simply posting it on the homepage.  It’s a great tool, but why is it buried?

 

The staggering amount of data about voters that is collected, cross-referenced and analyzed is overwhelming but impressive.  I assume that both parties have equally detailed databases.  People tend to feel as if their privacy has been invaded, but it should be no surprise that the bottom line of this technology is money, power and influence – on both sides. 

Of course it’s easier to point out the negatives.  Overall, the site looks great.  It’s networks – Facebook, del.icio.us and digg to name a few – are readily available. The RNC’s YouTube page is richly designed and opens with this video:

But again, all pages seem to take forever to load, which only perpetuates the impression that Republicans are old, stodgy and behind the times. 

Krohn had a right to be proud of the “Republican Platform Committee” page. 

For once in the tech realm, the Republicans had something great and they had it first.  The site is very interactive, allowing for both text and video entries.  It also was a wise call to allow (almost) everything to post.  Nothing should be hidden, especially when internet viewers are lurking in the shadows, ready at a moments notice to jump on an inaccuracy or inconsistency.  Also, the Valentines were funny and unique in their simplicity.  I’d definitely send one out!

Just a few criticisms, but overall, well-done, Republicans.