In Tuesday night’s debate for Democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton’s rivals went after her fairly aggressively on everything from consistency to integrity to electability. The frontrunner appeared a little rattled at time, but in the end, Clinton was probably no worse for wear.
But it’s the post-debate spin that’s turned out to be more provocative.
After the debate, the campaign presented a principal talking point: “Ultimately, it was six guys against her, and she came off as one strong woman.” A nearly identical phrase appeared on Clinton’s campaign website Wednesday morning. A few hours later, during a conference call, Clinton strategist Mark Penn said his newest polling data showed Barack Obama and John Edwards suffering a “backlash” among female voters — arguing that women rallied to Clinton’s defense because the male candidates went after her.
All of a sudden, the political reporters latched onto a new narrative: the campaign had played the “gender card.” Today, Clinton said the media has it all wrong.
Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that her status as the Democratic presidential front-runner — not her gender — has led her male primary rivals to intensify their criticism of her.
“I don’t think they’re piling on because I’m a woman. I think they’re piling on because I’m winning,” Clinton told reporters after filing paperwork to appear on the New Hampshire primary ballot.
“I anticipate it’s going to get even hotter, and if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I’m very much at home in the kitchen,” she said.
That strikes me as pretty persuasive.
The meme of the hour is that Clinton played the “gender card,” but the evidence is pretty thin. A lot of people are pointing to this example from yesterday…
Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton returned to her alma mater Tuesday, the all-women’s Wellesley College in Massachusetts, as her campaign suggested this week’s debate could help her with women voters.
Clinton seemed to allude to sharp attacks from Democratic rivals in Tuesday’s showdown, telling the enthusiastic crowd, “in so many ways, this all women’s college prepared me compete in the all boys’ club of presidential politics.”
…but like Ezra, I don’t see this as particularly troublesome.
That’s the only invocation of gender since the debate. And to me, it sounds like nothing more interesting than alumni puffery. She didn’t say the “boys” were beating up on her for being a woman. She didn’t say the questions were unfair or the attacks sexist. She just said that her alma mater helped prepare her to enter this world. That’s not making this about gender. It’s mentioning gender, and pumping up her college.
Agreed. Playing the victim takes a lot more than the mere mention of gender.
That said, while I think the media is blowing this way out of proportion — probably desperate to find a new narrative to talk about — part of me thinks this whole hullabaloo is Mark Penn’s fault. He’s the one who hosted a conference call to say that Obama’s and Edwards’ criticisms were driving women voters to Hillary. Since Tuesday, that’s probably the only legitimate instance of the campaign playing the “gender card” at all.
But maybe I’m misreading all of this. What do you guys think? A media-manufactured story or an exploitative campaign ploy?