“What Went Wrong?” isn’t the only one of its kind, but it’s the biggie making the rounds of the blogosphere right now. However, it’s from TNR — which ranks down there in the iffy “Politico territory” as reliability goes, in my opinion.
The article by Michelle Cottle can be summed-up thusly: “According to Clinton campaign insiders, none of whom wished to be named, Clinton put loyalty above competence in assembling and then running her campaign. When things went south, she held on too long to good friends who turned out to be bad campaigners.”
I have to wonder if any of these people now whispering their opinions to TNR writers actually tried to address their concerns to the candidate? If the answer is, “Yes, but they feel they failed to make her listen,” why couldn’t they have waited until June to semi-publicly air their grievances? Way to whittle your candidate’s odds down, folks.
I guess it doesn’t matter, because they’re obviously right; Clinton has relied on some really lousy people for her campaign. But isn’t it amazing that she’s done as well as she has despite that? The super delegates need to take note of that, and I hope they save the party from itself, come August.
There’s a big difference between campaigning and governing; I think we know which one Clinton is better at.
Meanwhile, I have a suspicion that thanks to Cottle’s piece, if Clinton can’t capture the nomination the media will decide that the Clinton 2008 campaign’s tombstone should read, “She was too sentimental.”
