London Sunday Times: "Slippery Hillary loses her aura of inevitability"

[Bluebear]

The old conventional wisdom: she’s inevitable. The new conventional wisdom: not so much.

The press loves a narrative. It drives our reporting and analysis, and the story for the better part of the past six months is that you might as well take a long nap between now and the moment that Hillary Clinton is sworn in as the next president of the United States.

If you were betting your life savings, you’d still be shrewd to put your money on the prevaricator, wherever she happens to be campaigning that day. But nothing is certain in politics; and the Clinton candidacy has been much less formidable so far than you have been led to believe.

The turning point, if it turns out to be one, was last Tuesday night in yet another Democratic debate. The hype was that Barack Obama was finally going to get tough with his main opponent.

But Obama seems unable to do such a thing. He sails elegantly above the fray, with complete paragraphs fluidly tripping off his tongue, his voice rarely rising above the even-tempered basso profundo of a college don. He has a quick grin, but not a rapier wit. He would have done rather poorly at the Oxford Union. Given several opportunities for a quick rhetorical kill against the frontrunner, he balked.

It was left to third-place John Edwards to keep hammering at Clinton’s core vulnerability: “The American people . . . deserve a president of the United States that they know will tell them the truth and won’t say one thing one time and something different at a different time.” You think?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article2799537.ece

[ccpup]

1. shades of the republican

Slick Willy theme from the 90s. And the Corporate Media -- regardless of Country -- is supposed to be for her? :shrug:

[Demeter]

2. If the Press in the US Were Doing It's Job

then good government might be inevitable!

[cali]

8. and this pertains to the article posted, how? n/t

[sniffa]

3. sLippery? nice sexist Language.

this is an outrage.

[aquart]

12. Rightwing opinion column, former editor of New Republic.

The OP is being misleading, making his post look like a news story or editorial.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Whatver Works For You I Guess

Electability. Clinton is seen as the most likely Democratic candidate to win in Nov. 2008 against any GOPer. This internal is not close at all. 62% of all Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents in this poll believe that Clinton has the best chance of getting selected president in Nov. 2008. Obama is seen as that most electable Democratic candidate by only 15%, well below his overall polling performance. Edwards is seen as the most electable by 14%, pretty much in line with his overall polling performance.


http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1050a1ElectionYear-Out.pdf

[Yael]

5. Ouch. Thats going to leave a mark

This guy is really on a rant! It gets worse at the link...

[cali]

6. rupert has this in the NY Post today too, I believe

Now what about the meme that Rupert wants her to win?

[Bluebear]

9. Now that is interesting!

You can't tell the players without a program. You can't even tell the players with a program anymore lol!

[CK_John]

7. This from a Moonie outlet. I'm shocked! n/t

[cosmicdot]

10. The London Sunday Times is part of News International

Rupert Murdoch's kingdom

[aquart]

11. Andrew Sullivan. Puhleeze.

It's a fucking column.

[Karmadillo]

13. And five recommends, too.

nt

[aquart]

15. DU will take Hillary hate no matter whence it comes.

Although there is that old "Lie down with dogs..." motto to worry about.

[Carrieyazel]

14. Hillary has been slippery. Refusing to answer questions. Waffling and pandering.

Solid article overall. The London Times is doing a service; something the lame American mainstream media are not doing. Sticking it to an awful candidate. Gotta love the British style. Sullivan sucks when he's writing for American publications. But when he's in the home country's papers he doesn't suck.

[aquart]

16. Yeah, right wing columnists are always honest and impartial.

Perfect news sources. But not, I would hope, for actual Democrats.