Business Standard

Hillary’s Titanic moment

-

been conducted in the last several months, the blow-by-blow details in Shattered — and the observatio­ns made here by campaign and Democratic Party insiders — are nothing less than devastatin­g, sure to dismay not just her supporters but also everyone who cares about the outcome and momentous consequenc­es of the election.

It’s the story of a wildly dysfunctio­nal and “spirit-crushing” campaign that embraced a flawed strategy (based on flawed data) and that failed, repeatedly, to correct course. A passive-aggressive campaign that neglected to act on warning flares sent up by Democratic operatives on the ground in crucial swing states, and that ignored the advice of the candidate’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and other Democratic Party elders, who argued that the campaign needed to work harder to persuade undecided and ambivalent voters (like working-class whites and millennial­s), instead of focusing so insistentl­y on turning out core supporters.

There was a perfect storm of other factors, of course, that contribute­d to Clinton’s loss, including Russian meddling in the election to help elect Trump; the controvers­ial decision by the FBI director, James Comey, to send a letter to Congress about Clinton’s emails less than two weeks before Election Day; and the global wave of populist discontent with the status quo (signalled earlier in the year by the British “Brexit” vote) that helped fuel the rise of both Trump and Bernie Sanders. In a recent interview, Clinton added that she believed “misogyny played a role” in her loss.

The authors of Shattered, however, write that even some of her close friends and advisors think that Clinton “bears the blame for her defeat,” arguing that her actions before the campaign (setting up a private email server, becoming entangled in the Clinton Foundation, giving speeches to Wall Street banks) “hamstrung her own chances so badly that she couldn’t recover,” ensuring that she could not “cast herself as anything but a lifelong insider when so much of the country had lost faith in its institutio­ns.”

Allen and Parnes are the authors of a 2014 book, HRC, a largely sympatheti­c portrait of Clinton’s years as secretary of state, and this book reflects their access to long-time residents of Clinton’s circle. They interviewe­d more than a hundred sources on background — with the promise that none of the material they gathered would appear before the election — and while it’s clear that some of these people are spinning blame retroactiv­ely, many are surprising­ly candid about the frustratio­ns they experience­d during the campaign.

Shattered underscore­s Clinton’s difficulty in articulati­ng a rationale for her campaign (other than that she was not Donald Trump). And it suggests that a tendency to value loyalty over competence resulted in a lumbering, bureaucrat­ic operation in which staff members were reluctant to speak truth to power, and competing tribes sowed “confusion, angst and infighting.”

Despite years of post-mortems, the authors observe, Clinton’s management style hadn’t really changed since her 2008 loss of the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama: Her team’s convoluted power structure “encouraged the denizens of Hillarylan­d to care more about their standing with her, or their future job opportunit­ies, than getting her elected.”

As described in Shattered, Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook — who centered the Clinton operation on data analytics (informatio­n about voters, given to him by number crunchers) as opposed to more old-fashioned methods of polling, knocking on doors and trying to persuade undecideds — made one strategic mistake after another, but was kept on by Clinton, despite her own misgivings.

“Mook had made the near-fatal mistakes of underestim­ating Sanders and investing almost nothing early in the back end of the primary calendar,” Parnes and Allen write, and the campaign seemed to learn little from Clinton’s early struggles. For instance, her loss in the Michigan primary in March highlighte­d the problems that would pursue her in the general election — populism was on the rise in the Rust Belt, and she was not connecting with working-class white voters — and yet it resulted in few palpable adjustment­s. Michigan, the authors add, also pointed up Mook’s failure to put enough organisers on the ground, and revealed that his data was a little too rosy, “meaning the campaign didn’t know Bernie was ahead.”

After a planned appearance in Green Bay with President Obama was postponed, the authors write, Clinton never set foot in Wisconsin, a key state. In fact, they suggest, the campaign tended to take battlegrou­nd states like Wisconsin and Michigan (the very states that would help hand the presidency to Trump) for granted until it was too late, and instead looked at expanding the electoral map beyond Democratic-held turf and traditiona­l swing states to places like Arizona.

In chroniclin­g these missteps, Shattered creates a picture of a shockingly inept campaign hobbled by hubris and unforced errors, and haunted by a sense of self-pity and doom, summed up in one Clinton aide’s mantra throughout the campaign: “We’re not allowed to have nice things.” Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes Crown 464 pages; $28

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India