Playing the bin Laden card?

April 21, 2008

The Clinton campaign is starting to develop an m.o. — unveil a provocative new ad in the 11th hour, right before an important contest. We saw it with the “3 a.m.” ad, which sparked considerable discussion, and we’re seeing it again today, with this new ad, called, “Kitchen.”

As Chris Cillizza explained, “The ad hits virtually every possible emotional touchstone for voters from 18 to 80 — the bombing of Pearl Harbor, long gas lines in the 1970s, Osama bin-Laden and Hurricane Katrina.”

The ad’s narrator tells viewers, “It’s the toughest job in the world. You need to be ready for anything — especially now, with two wars, oil prices skyrocketing and an economy in crisis. Harry Truman said it best: ‘If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.’ Who do you think has it what takes?”

The Obama campaign quickly responded with a statement of its own: “When Senator Clinton voted with President Bush to authorize the war in Iraq, she made a tragically bad decision that diverted our military from the terrorists who attacked us, and allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and regenerate his terrorist network. It’s ironic that she would borrow the President’s tactics in her own campaign and invoke bin Laden to score political points. We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, and we don’t need another.”

Maybe I’m still desensitized, but like the “3 a.m.” ad, I don’t really find the ad offensive at all. Including bin Laden in the commercial ratchets up the emotional intensity a bit, but all things considered, the spot seems relatively mild to me.

What’s the message? That it’s a scary world and Clinton is prepared for it. That, of course, has more or less been the Clinton campaign message for the last 15 months. The difference is, now she’s running campaign ads featuring bin Laden.

The initial response from the Obama campaign directed reporters to a video of Bill Clinton in 2004 saying, “If one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other one’s trying to get you to think; if one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope.”

True enough. But I’ve seen plenty of demagogic fear-mongering, and this ain’t it. There’s a touch of the “fear card” there, but it’s so mild, it maybe registers a two on the political Richter scale.

The only criticism I’d offer over the ad is the Truman quote: “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” This has been a Clinton campaign staple since Thursday, when ABC’s debate in Philadelphia drew widespread criticism.

But it really doesn’t make any sense. Obama criticized the debate, not because he “couldn’t stand the heat,” but because the questions were really dumb and elevated trivia over substance. What’s more, it’s Clinton who has complained about the media and debate questions for months (in one recent instance, she even complained about the media during a debate). In this sense, the closing message of the new commercial doesn’t work at all.

Nevertheless, I suspect we’ll be hearing quite a bit about it. Any ad that includes footage of bin Laden is going to be provocative; there’s no way around that. In fact, I suspect far more people will see the ad on the news (for free) than during the commercial breaks — which, I imagine, is part of the strategy.

Yeah, I don’t see anything wrong with the ad. Just seems like another variation on the dumb “3am” ad.

As for the Truman quote, I found that jarring as well. Obama wasn’t complaining about the heat in the kitchen. He was complaining that the neighbor’s kids had pooped all over the floors.

  • Yeah, it’s another hit at the “experience and judgment” talking point.

    The problem is that this point has been undermined by everything that’s gone on in the campaign, and, more to the point, in Iraq. If Hillary was such a reliable, seasoned old hand, why’d she get the AUMF wrong? And why’d she blow the humongous lead she had before the primaries started?

  • It’s a beyond-stupid ad, and certainly not the first or the last. I’m not the brightest bulb in the bin, but just in case any of the poor souls workign for Hillary peruse blogs for input or advice…

    Open-ended questions in a political ad BUH-LOW! Don’t ask us something as stupid as “Who do you think has what it takes.” First of all, you might not like the answer, dumbasses. Second of all, you don’t follow it with a single thought word or image that explains WHY Hillary might “have what it takes.” You just hope putting her picture after the graphic will do all the heavy lifting, and it doesn’t. Not by a long chalk.Were you hoping it would be controversial, get people talking? Well, congratulations, people will be talking about what a worthless ad it is. It’s barely “fear-mongering.” What it is, is a “warm and fuzzy.” It’s supposed to make you feel GOOD about voting for Clinton, yet you’ve offered no compelling narrative as to WHY.

    But hey, why start now?

  • Well, there may be nothing “wrong” with the ad, but the slimy intent is clear (caveat: I’m at work and can’t view the ad, so I rely on Steve’s description). Research has shown that fear makes people more reactionary. It seems like a pretty transparent attempt to model Repubs’ targeting of voters’ limbic systems instead of their reasoning faculties. Just as with the Repubs, the goal is to push voters to the more conservative candidate.

  • all its saying is she has balls of steel and he’s a wimp.

    the question is whether it’s effective. specifically, does the transformation of her narrow “heat/kitchen” criticism of Obama’s supposed “complaining” into a broader condemnation of his fitness and fortitude work? (Remember she hit this heat/kitchen thing for several days against the whole field back in November: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2007/11/03/clinton_vows_to_weather_attacks/ )

    In my opinion, it does not work well at all.

  • maybe if we didn’t go into iraq, osama wouldn’t be at large. who is responsible for such a colossal f*ck-up. oh yeah, bush. and mcSame, and hillary.

  • Karmi (6):Might be working…Drudge is reporting – “CLINTON INTERNALS SHOW 11-POINT LEAD IN PA”

    So she’s sharing her internals with Drudge now? Wow. They’ve come a long way since reporting on a stained blue dress.

  • Strangely enough, Hils wasn’t prepared to take on a serious challenger post Super Tuesday.

  • I don’t see a big deal with this run-of-the-mill ad at all. I watched a bunch of images and got asked a question at the end, which I answered in my head “Obama.” Comment number 4 above is spot on.

  • It sounds like another Hillary rip-off of a Rove tactic. I really think she has become Rove’s step-child or protegee or something. It’s like she’s trying all of these right wing attack strategies. She may not be employing them with the greatest of skill, but the philosophy behind the attacks is clearly Rovian.

    I doubt Hillary or her advisors have ever stopped to contemplate why Barack Obama was able to catch up with her, especially after a +20% lead. Do they not realize that a lot of people are looking for a change in tone on how things are done in Washington? Like McCain, all she is offering is 4 more years of the same divisiveness in Washington. And that’s evident in her attacks on Barack Obama.

    Right now I’m worried about Democrats prospects for a win in November. I’d feel more comfortable with Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee if she attacked John McCain like a Democrat instead of Barack Obama like a Republican.

  • Who do you think has it what takes?

    Barack Obama.

    Simple answers for simple questions.

  • Not that it matters much but Bin Laden is dead and buried. Been dead for years.
    What does matter is neither candidate is talking about the very real problem that is destroying our democracy and that is the privatization of our government. America is being turned into the USA corporation…my god even our votes have been privatized. The only reason the dems won a majority in ’06 is because voters overwhelmingly voted democratic and enough votes could not be stolen because of the huge amount of democratic voter turnouts. “00 and ’04 presidential elections were stolen and we still have not been given the correct vote count.

    Rumsfeld got patents on life saving avian flu vaccines preventing these meds being generically produced in epidemics. (If Salk did that with the polio vaccine hakld our nation would have died). Rumsfeld is still invested in patenting life saving aids medications. These guys pray for an epidemic of some kind where only they have the cure which can be bought for the right price of course.
    Cheney did the same with getting Haliburton cost plus contracts for all military support services which has resulted in such high profits from the pentagon that our treasury is filled with iou’s for years to come.
    Bush did the same with private prisons in Texas which he immediately set about filling.
    These republicans will try to privatize everything they can from the post office to our drinking water to profiteer off our democracy.
    The Sunday NYT article shows that even ‘retired’ generals would sell us out to guard their investments. The fix has been in for the past 7yrs to the point that we have a democracy in name only. Getting the SC to appoint our dictator rather than count the votes (even when the justices should have recused themselves because they were involved with the Bush campaign) was the beginning of the cou’.
    Are the powers too big for our candidates to challenge at this point. Getting the power out of the hands of this administration is next to revolution rather than just calling it ‘change’. I fear the USA corporation more than anything else…because it cannot even be mentioned in this campaign

  • Bill Clinton in 2004 saying, “If one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other one’s trying to get you to think; if one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope.”

    Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Too bad he didn’t send that memo to his wife.

  • Well… It’s not aimed so much at Obama’s supporters but at those who are still undecided. Putting a bit of fear-pepper on their tails might just help them make that decision, especially since there’s no time left for Obama to counteract it. We’ll see Wednesday morning whether it’s worked or not.

  • Yes, you are desensitized. But more than that your entire perspective is wrong. You’re asking “what’s this ad doing to me.” I hate to break it to you, but your feelings don’t matter here. The proper question is “what’s this ad doing?” And there the clear answer is that it’s playing up fears of a scary world.

  • Watching the ad, I just look at all the crises and I think, “I don’t trust her to be able to handle any one of those crises. She’s too reactionary rather than proactive and she makes decisions on politics rather than what is right.”

  • Maybe the ad is “mild” in comparison to some. BUT…it clearly falls into the category of fear inspired politics.

  • “The ad’s narrator tells viewers, “It’s the toughest job in the world. You need to be ready for anything — especially now, with two wars, oil prices skyrocketing and an economy in crisis. Harry Truman said it best: ‘If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.’ Who do you think has it what takes?”” – from Article

    These ads seems pointless. Without a picture of the candidate, or a candidate voice over, or a speech, the viewer is going to think their candidate “has what it takes”.

    I think it hurts her in the fact that it is fear mongering and just because Bush desensitized us to it, doesn’t mean it’s not. Her followers might as well be republicans because man they troll with the best of them and don’t like reasoning. Or maybe the trolls are republicans acting like they love HRC. Either way, it’s been played out. Bush threw a Chicken Little fit over telecom immunity and no one cared, why would HRC’s people think they were going to scare them.

  • Mary, he has my two sons engaged in politics for the first time. They’re thinking about where they want this country to go and how to make things better for all people. So, yes, if it comes between fear and hope, my family chooses hope.

  • This ad just made me giggle..WTF?

    ” Who do you think has it what takes?”

    Sorry, made me think of another ubiquitous ad with the voice used to narrate.

    Answer: The few, the proud, the marines…

    didn’t even know they were running…write-ins?

  • If you can’t take the heat,get out of the kitchen?Phone calls at three a.m.? Sorry, Hill didn’t hear the phone ringing,she was in the kitchen,whipping up a batch of cookies.

  • come on like it is not known that Osama rhymes with some democratic candidate name… what kind of naiverté is this?

  • True enough. But I’ve seen plenty of demagogic fear-mongering, and this ain’t it. There’s a touch of the “fear card” there, but it’s so mild, it maybe registers a two on the political Richter scale.

    Maybe it was just really clumsily done?

    ’ Who do you think has it what takes?”

    Hilary Clinton wouldn’t be in my first 100 answers to that question.
    The answer, for most people, is going to be either one of her opponents or “None of the above”
    This is preaching to the choir of the first magnitude. It’s for the voter who shouts “Hilary!” at the TV and pumps her fist. It’s a GOTV piece, designed to motivate, not persuade.

    • Comments are closed.