State, national columnists

Calculating Hillary Clinton gets the math all wrong

By From page A11 | August 13, 2014

Picture the ad, either in the Democratic primaries or from a liberal independent candidate: Hillary Clinton – a pro-Wall Street buckraker, a foreign policy interventionist – championing George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and looking like a lukewarm supporter of President Barack Obama.

Clinton’s break last week with some of Obama’s unpopular foreign policies, in an interview with my colleague Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic, is going to cause her political problems.

It makes her look calculating – probably unfairly – when she already faces some skepticism about her authenticity. And her hawkish, interventionist stance is at odds with the country and especially the base of the Democratic party, of which she remains a formidable favorite to lead in the 2016 presidential race.

Her support from Wall Street and the huge speaking fees she has taken from financial institutions since departing as secretary of state have already set off alarms with the Elizabeth Warren-loving populist wing of her party. Even in the country at large, Wall Street is about as popular as Congress, slightly ahead of toxic dump sites.

In the Atlantic interview, she essentially re-stated previous positions; she has long advocated an activist foreign policy. For good measure, she seemed to suggest she’d be more supportive of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than Obama has been.

This at a time when little is going well for the president on the international front. Voters, by 60 percent to 36 percent, disapprove of the president’s handling of foreign policy, according to last week’s Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll.

Yet, as Politico’s Maggie Haberman, a premiere Hillary watcher, reported, while it was her “furthest, most public step away” from Obama, the interview was scheduled well before the latest Islamic State-induced crisis, and the Hillary camp warned the White House about it.

In 2008, then-Sen. Clinton ran against Obama as a backer of a muscular foreign policy who had voted for the Iraq invasion; it hurt her in that losing quest. She subsequently said she was mistaken on the war, yet now she’s urging a greater American involvement in the region.

On Libya, she gets a bum rap from Republicans who hold her responsible for the killing of Americans in Benghazi two years ago. But she was the champion of American intervention in Libya to overthrow Moammar Gadhafi. When he was toppled, she thought it would be her signature achievement as secretary of state. Yet as that country has disintegrated into chaos, it’s no longer a point of emphasis.

Clinton also hinted at further breaks with Obama policies. That’s natural, yet she has to walk a delicate line, not looking too contrived. Surveys show Americans give her good marks for competence, intelligence and experience, but not so good on integrity and candor. And while Obama’s popularity is low, his hardcore base remains loyal.

Clinton is an overwhelming favorite to win the Democratic nomination in two years, but her evolving positions may well encourage potential challengers who could be damaging. Think Pat Buchanan and the Republicans in 1992, or even Gene McCarthy and the Democrats in 1968.

Albert R. Hunt is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was formerly the executive editor of Bloomberg News, directing coverage of the Washington bureau.


Albert R. Hunt


Discussion | 5 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • BobAugust 13, 2014 - 5:55 am

    Obama not backing Israel according to Hillary? One is protecting Muslims and the other lies about everything, starting right after law school with the Watergate investigation. Is anyone suprised?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • 2realAugust 13, 2014 - 6:34 am

    No way hillary. Go roll one up for bill. You guys are top shelf scammers.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895August 13, 2014 - 6:55 am

    This column is too vague for comment.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DanielAugust 13, 2014 - 8:17 am

    There's no doubt about it, Hillary is going to run against Obama. She has to because he is such a disaster, it's still incredible that the partisan hacks still can't see it, I guess because of their hatred of the GOP they can't see the damaged goods that they have on hand while Obama is out playing golf again.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JimboAugust 13, 2014 - 7:11 pm

    Unlike republicans of lately the democratic cabinet posts are not all hand picked people who will only agree with the president.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.