Skip Navigation
Clive Crook

Clive Crook - Clive Crook is a senior editor of The Atlantic and a columnist for Bloomberg View. He was the Washington columnist for the Financial Times, and before that worked at The Economist for more than 20 years, including 11 years as deputy editor. Crook writes about the intersection of politics and economics. More

Crook writes about the intersection of politics and economics.

Hillary's speech

By Clive Crook
Aug 27 2008, 12:54 AM ET Comment

She was at her best. It was a fine speech, an urgent call for unity, and the delivery was phenomenal: passionate, forceful, and not the least bit false. (There was humor too: the twin-cities joke was great, and will linger in people's minds next week.) From the various personalities she tried on during the campaign, she selected tough, resolute, never-give-up Hillary, and the tone did not deviate. This is much the best and most convincing of the Hillaries: one imagines, in fact, the real thing. If she had stuck with her throughout the primaries, she might have been giving a speech like that on Thursday night instead.

A lot of previously wavering Democrats will be wondering if they have chosen the wrong nominee; even more will be wondering if it was a mistake to deny her the VP slot. But one can hardly blame her for that. The convention wanted a great rousing speech and it got one.

Was it a whole-hearted endorsement of Obama? Having watched an hour or so of instant commentary--which for the most part said yes, it was--I find I disagree. Certainly, there was nothing mean in the speech (though I wondered about the repeated reference to "universal" health care: a coded rebuke, maybe, since her campaign continually stressed that Obama's plan falls short of that). And she certainly told her supporters to vote for him. That was crystal clear. She did not give them tacit permission to stay at home, still less vote for McCain.

So she cannot be accused of sabotaging Barack. If he fails, after this, she will be available in 2012. But there was almost no praise. (Compare Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney on John McCain.) She made the case for a Democratic president, but not for Obama. What she said, in a superbly effective way, was that another four years of Bushism made voting for Obama necessary--in so many words, whatever reservations one might have about him.

I'm sure the speech helps Obama. Much as Hillary still wants to be president, she erred in that direction. Maybe she will get her reward in four years. But it was not an entirely selfless speech. I think she could have helped him more, had she chosen to.


Update: I've just read Josh Green's take. Hillary goes out with a whimper? About as much passion as a Wednesday night city council meeting? Good grief, Josh, were we listening to the same speech?



Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Myth of Energy Independence: Why We Can't Drill Our Way to Oil Autonomy The Myth of Energy Independence
'State of the WaPo' Watch: Two Articles Worth Reading The State of the Washington Post
The agony of Nabeel Rajab The Plight of Bahrain's Informal Activist Leader
Who Are the Real 'Freeloaders': The Poor or the Old? Who Are America's Real 'Freeloaders'?
We Don't Need a Digital Sabbath, We Need More Time Do We Really Need a Digital Sabbath?

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
The Civil War National Portrait Gallery The Civil War
President Obama reflects on what Lincoln means to him and to America, in an introduction to our special issue. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Athens in Flames

Feb 13, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)