Matthew Dowd
Matthew Dowd has been a campaign strategist in races throughout the country. In 30 years, Dowd has worked for Democrats and Republicans, most recently serving as chief strategist for President George W. Bush in 2004.
RECENT POSTS
- Obama Didn't Buy the Presidency
- Dowd: Top Five Reasons McCain Will Likely Lose
- Obama's Race to Lose; Pressure Points on Palin
- The Remaining Game Changers
- Two Conventions Down
- Democratic Convention: Mechanics Good, Message Missing
- VP Choice: Another Meaningful '08 Moment
- Michigan Memories & Musings
- It's the Economy...Again
- Obama Brand: Truth or Consequences
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
« Previous | Main | Next »
How Obama Won and Clinton Lost
June 03, 2008 6:20 PM
Opinion by Matthew Dowd, ABC News Political Contributor
A year ago, Hillary Clinton was 30-points ahead over any rival in the Democratic primary. She had outraised everyone at that point by more than a two to one margin. She had the backing of the majority of the Democratic establishment. She had the backing of a popular former President who happened to be her husband. And she lost.
So what happened?
Like any story, the reasons and causes aren't easily reduced to a one paragraph explanation and there were multiple causes for why Clinton lost. I will reflect on just on a few from my perspective.
This is a race that Clinton could have won and should have won, and came very close. And her gender ultimately didn't have much to do with the loss.
The following is my attempt at explaining what happened:
1. She ran for months and months as the candidate of experience and the electorate overwhelmingly wanted change. She wasted many resources and much time arguing and building a case based on experience, and two-thirds of Democratic voters wanted change. She tried turning this around late in the game and Obama owned it at that point.
2. The political environment of this race was much different than 2004 or 2000. In those elections, strength was the key attribute the country was looking for. The country desired more of a father figure. Today, the country is looking for more a a healing presence, someone more nurturing and demonstrating an ability to bring the American family together –- more of a mothering persona. The country wanted a Mom, and Hillary gave them a Dad. She tried to hard to demonstrate her toughness and strength and voters wanted more caretaking and sensitivity.
3. Presidential campaigns are always about understanding voters fears, but then asking them to vote their hopes. Clinton did an unbelievable job speaking to voters fears but she never crossed the bridge to speak to voters hopes. She got stuck in the fear equation and voters needed her to move to hope at some point.
4. The Clinton campaign based their tactical strategy on the idea that this would be a short race and big state victories early would decide it quickly. This primary became a long race and every single caucus or primary mattered. Clinton scrambled to retool the campaign based on a longer effort, in the midst of a heated primary.
5. Hillary Clinton never separated herself enough from Bill in the course of this race. Voters wanted to see her stand on her own two feet, and understand that on her own she could do the job and it would be her presidency. Every time Bill showed up on the radar it reminded voters that she wasn't on her own. And couple this with fact that Bill Clinton, while having a great political ear and voice advocating on behalf of himself, seems to not be as adept at advocating on behalf of someone else.
6. The country is looking for something new and hip and next generational, and this is especially true for voters under 30 (the 9/11 generation). Barack Obama gave voters this, and Hillary didn't. Obama was the Ipod of this election, while Clinton was the Walkman. The Walkman is reliable and easy to use and works great, it just doesn't have the hip factor that an Ipod does.
Obviously, this is only a short list of causes from my own perspective, and equally as important was Obama's candidacy, his message, and his campaign's tactical successes.
But in the end, this race was in Hillary Clinton's hands and it is a race she should have won, no matter her opponent.
And dealing with a loss where you didn't have to lose, but for your own actions, is heartwrenching. I do feel for the process she must be going through and will go through. Peace to her.
June 3, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (1022)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
You couldn't be more wrong Ed. Obama made a speech denouncing the war before the idiotic Senate gave Bush the OK. He didn't have to make that speech - and he took a major political risk because the country's war approval rate was over 80% at the time. So drop your "sit on the fence" nonsense and come back to the real world.
Posted by: proudelibrul | Jun 3, 2008 6:59:06 PM
Funny Obama preached about the establishment and you fell for it...he preached about change and you feel for it...unfortuate he is the establishement along with all the puppet makers of his and no one question what change really meant..of course change was inevitable regardless and now it seem less likely with another Obama - Bush equivalent...no experience all show no realy substance just like our current President which was voted in office 2X...by a similar platform...AMerica is in more trouble if OBama wins and there is no change except all we have left if Obama gets elected...
Posted by: dell | Jun 3, 2008 7:00:14 PM
Oops, mean dell, not Ed.
Posted by: proudlibrul | Jun 3, 2008 7:00:20 PM
Its a sad day again in the USA. This was not a democratic election, not an election of the people but of the superdelegates, THEY CHOSE THE NOMINEE! We didn't. Well to all you Obama supporters, congrats. Your probably the same fools that voted for George and you can see where he led us. Let's pray for the best and that the anti-american messages he listened to from his pastor and friend, will not make its way into the white house.
This from a former democrat, soon to vote republican for the first time ever!
Posted by: JCP | Jun 3, 2008 7:00:45 PM
And what happens if the cool uniter and "mom figure" Obama can't even mesmerize and unite the Democratic Party itself?
Posted by: ed | Jun 3, 2008 7:00:56 PM
Dowd forgets a critical point - the "media primary" was won in a landslide by Obama. When every article is fawning and infused with admiration, it is difficult for another candidate to break through. If the shoes were on the opposite feet and Clinton hobbled to the nomination after losing three primaries in the last two weeks by TWO to ONE (West Virginia, Kentucky, Puerto Rico) the media would be all over her as a seriously "flawed candidate" - instead it is more glowing reports about Obama.
Posted by: Jeff | Jun 3, 2008 7:02:14 PM
I agree somewhat. However, I expected more from Hillary in terms of her decision-making. She's had to retract her decisions/beliefs on critical issues: 1) the Iraq War, 2)NAFTA. While her idea for Universal Healthcare sounds good to the hearing ear, if you listen to and read the plan, it will be detrimental to the average American who can't afford another drop of mandatory paycuts. Her plan will force people to pay for health insurance, such as most states where individuals are forced to pay for car insurance. Most people will take their chances with the law until they are caught. They simply can't afford it. --These observation are in a nutshell. I will not get into how Hillary behaved towards Obama during the primaries.
Posted by: Rational Voter | Jun 3, 2008 7:02:47 PM
Kake - Anyone that rewards any Republican with their vote after 8 years of lies, mismanagement, incompetence, etc. deserves what they will get - more of the same.
Posted by: proudelibrul | Jun 3, 2008 7:03:41 PM
Ed S, you are correct, the biggest factor by far is the Iraq occupation.
But you didn't expect a wingnut like Matthew Dowd to admit that did you?
Hey Dowd, if you're currently a lobbyist, John 'Lil' Bush' McCain is hiring.
Posted by: Stram | Jun 3, 2008 7:04:07 PM
i did not have sex with that woman...but i got loofahthingy
Posted by: bill-o | Jun 3, 2008 7:05:09 PM
To All Obama Supporters: You go ahead keep being mean;guess what, Obama WILL lose in Nov. because a big portion of Hillary's supporters, including my whole family, will vote for McCain in Nov.!
Posted by: Joan | Jun 3, 2008 7:07:01 PM
one word of friendly advice for obama...from all the talk i hear...you better learn to duck
Posted by: ron | Jun 3, 2008 7:08:59 PM
Oh, "Jake," your post isn't any more creative than your choice of screen name! You and s.b. repeating tired old lines of Obama and DNC stealing the election from Hillabeans!!!
She stole it from herself!!! No one else to blame! It was hers to lose, ad by golly, she up and lost it!!!
Obama 2008 -- Yes, WE CAN!!!
Posted by: jackt51 | Jun 3, 2008 7:09:57 PM
The media has helped to create the Obama momentum when it treated Obama as a rockstar and acted as his advance men during much of the early campaign.
Once the momentum is on track, the celebrity-blinded public just followed the crowd without questioning. And the crown got bigger and bigger.
Belatedly when the media started to look into the truth of this rock star Obama, all the eyebrow-raising questions about this man did not matter anymore because the blind passion obstructed any fact and truth.
Hillary's message and her contributions to America have been washed away by the tsunami of the mob passion.
ANOTHER TRIUMPH OF THE MOB WITH THE HELP OF MEDIA DRUMMER BOYS.
CONGRATULATIONS! AMERICA.
Posted by: nomob | Jun 3, 2008 7:12:25 PM
She lost because people did not want anymore Clintons in the Whitehouse. Very simple.
Posted by: Kottaras | Jun 3, 2008 7:13:38 PM
I agree with the points outlined in the article. I was also for Barack because he was against the Iraqi war from the start. Clinton admitted her misjudgment but I prefer NOT to have a president with his or her hand on the button. She even had the audacity to make bold statements about potentially attacking Iran. Barack appears to have a cooler head than Hillary. I like the fact that he is willing to to sit and talk with our "enemies" instead of our leader's normal approach further alienating ourselves from them.
Hillary mentions that her past actions indicate how she will perform in the future. I like the concept but her efforts for Universal failed in the 90's and I will mention again- she voted for the Iraqi war!!
Posted by: Ronnie | Jun 3, 2008 7:13:54 PM
It's easy just " Hope" you will get elected.
Posted by: catleya | Jun 3, 2008 7:15:02 PM
One major problem with his theories: this is the democratic party's nominee, not the country's. Let's see if his theories hold for the country when its Obama and McCain.
Posted by: susan | Jun 3, 2008 7:15:45 PM
Obama can get all the delegates and super ones too. Not my vote though.
I bet all the conspirators will eliminate write in candidates to prevent Hillary from the ballot.
Posted by: novote | Jun 3, 2008 7:16:18 PM
Hillary lost because of the DNC primary rules. Nevermind FL and MI, Hillary won the popular votes in both NV and TX yet Obama walked away with more delegates. No one can explain that. We can go back and forth on why Hillary lost, we'll just go around in circles, but what can't be denied is the fact that the person with the most votes will not be the nominee. So why even vote when the delegates choose the nominee and not the voters?
Posted by: Romeo | Jun 3, 2008 7:17:04 PM
Post a comment
