Looks Like Clinton Will Turn to Carville, Begala

MANCHESTER, NH -- The official denials have been issued, but the buzz all around the Hillary Clinton for president camp is that Jim Carville and Paul Begala, will ride to the rescue of a campaign that is expected to suffer a serious loss in today's New Hampshire primary.

The strategists behind Bill Clinton's 1992 "comeback kid" presidential race will try to forge a comeback for the New York senator in a contest where her "star power" is being eclipsed by Illinois Senator Barack Obama's surging candidacy.

Officially, Carville and others are dismissing the talk. They have to do that while New Hampshire voters are still heading to the polls.

But the sense is that Clinton will have to radically restructure her campaign, and it does now appear that the process is likely to begin with a move to put Carville and Begala is charge of an organization that had been led by Mark Penn, Clinton's senior strategist, and Patty Solis Doyle, Clinton's campaign manager.

Comments (45)

1. Just the image of the "Ragin' Cajun" and Begala TRYING to "ride to Her rescue" is embarassing and a major hit to the campaign.

   It would reinforce the idea that BILL'S PEOPLE "know what they're doing" not HILLARY'S HAND-CHOSEN PEOPLE and that they "brought in the WINNERS to win, and kicked out HER 'losers'!"

   Again, a shake-up in the campaign is too little, too late. We're (somebody check my math) 11 days to South Carolina and 28 to Super Tuesday. By the time they "shape up you bunch of apes" (little Heinlein drill sargeant talk) to the Old Staff, they'll be almost to SC and Obama scoops up all her African-American vote in that primary.

   Then the MSM story becomes "Carville and Begala are building a 'firewall' on Super Tuesday" and NO Democratic primary voter (except may be a few FRANKGRITSes) wants to be known as "somebody's 'firewall'".

   Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 2:20pm

2. Please refer to "Our Brand is Crisis" for an education on Carville and his consulting group. Picking them is probably the best example of everything that is wrong with the HRC campaign.

   Posted by srjenkins at 01/08/2008 @ 2:20pm

3. Panic move or strategic move? Does it show she's freakin' out and "doing whatever it takes to win" or does it show she's accepting the fact that her initial plan wasn't working and is willing to try something new (unlike a certain current president). I think she's got a lot of faults but I don't know if I can honestly fault her for acknowledging a problem and legitimately trying to fix it (unlike her staged "tears" trying to garner the sympathy of voters).

   Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 2:28pm

4. On the other hand, this is typical Hillary. She's not the blame for her polling numbers, oh no! It must be her staff of advisers. Just like she's not to blame for her Iraq war vote. Nope, that was Bush & company's faulty intelligence.

   No need to take any personal responsibility with those views.

   Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 2:30pm

5. If Carville or Begala can't make Hillary and her record disappear and replace with a totally new person, then they might as well take a pass.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 01/08/2008 @ 2:49pm

6. Anyone ever notice how in the past white liberals wrote off the South as unwinnable? I always used to wonder why African Americans were never weighed in the calculation. Now the formula seems to be a black man can win the South based on the African American vote. Doesn't it all go against the conventionial wisdom of the past?

   Posted by Lil at 01/08/2008 @ 2:50pm

7. 'First-rate people hire first-rate people, second-rate people hire third-rate people.'-- Robert Townsend, former president of Avis Rent-A-Car

   Posted by HonestLiberal at 01/08/2008 @ 2:51pm

8. Well Carville is a real pro and a 'much' better choice than Penn. Whether he can save Hillary's candidacy remains to be seen. Certainly he will have to depart from Penn's Rovian-style strategy to have any chance at all.

   Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 2:54pm

9. Jesse Jackson did well in the South, so not sure about the comment about white liberals writing off the south -- although I wouldn't be surprised if the "Conventional Wisdom" did, as it is always wrong.

   So, Carville and Begala are saddling up their white horses, huh? This is almost interesting.

   Posted by RLawrence at 01/08/2008 @ 2:58pm

10. Carville, Part Deux: It's the change, stupid.

    Posted by Steve1us at 01/08/2008 @ 3:01pm

11. Whether he can save Hillary's candidacy remains to be seen. Certainly he will have to depart from Penn's Rovian-style strategy to have any chance at all.----Posted by METTEYYA 01/08/2008 @ 2:54pm

    Uh, METTE, doesn't that mean that you consider her candidacy CAPABLE of being saved and that she CAN have a chance?...and ergo, that Obama CAN lose the nomination?

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 3:01pm

12. When is anyone going to discuss the disaster of starting the caucuses and primaries so soon. It seems this has backfired for Hillary. Letting Obama rack up the first primaries long before Super Tuesday was a huge mistake. If the "old guard" Dems want to see that their man or woman wins next time, they'd better get control of the states trying to be first in line.

    However, if you are happy with Clinton's demise, then you'll want to leave it as is.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 01/08/2008 @ 3:04pm

13. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119976546847474153.html?mod=hpp_us_insid e_today

    Thar she blows

    Posted by Lil at 01/08/2008 @ 3:20pm

14. The criticism of Mr. Obama and the press appeared to be the sharpest Mr. Clinton has offered publicly since his interview with Charlie Rose last month. -----Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 3:35pm

    And came off sounding like somebody angry and bitter...NOT somebody expecting things to "turn around after New Hampshire"!

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 3:45pm

15. Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 3:39pm

    FRNAKGRITS,

    If you think it is just a matter of finding dirt on Obama that is going to save Hillary's campaign, you are smoking the same funny cigarettes as Mark Penn.

    In case you didn't get the word from Iowa, VOTERS ARE TURNED OFF BY HILLARY'S NEGATIVE ATTACKS ON OBAMA, ESPECIALLY WOMEN!!!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 3:53pm

16. Posted by MASK 01/08/2008 @ 3:01pm

    Anything can happen in politics, MASK.

    All I am saying is that Hillary is going to have to have a dramatic makeover in personality, style and substance, and I'm not sure she is up to it as I think she links looking and sounding like an angry, old, cold fish.

    Carville clearly has A LOT of work to do!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 3:57pm

17. That should have read, "I think [Hillary] "likes" looking and sounding like and angry, old, cold fish"

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 4:01pm

18. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 01/08/2008 @ 3:56pm

    Well, it would work better than Mike Huckabee saying "I'm going to bring back the EIGHTEEN-90s!"...heheh

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 4:12pm

19. Posted by METTEYYA 01/08/2008 @ 3:57pm

    Well, I just thought it was interesting that you concede She-Who-Usted-To-Be-Obeyed CAN still win the nomination.

    Before you were sounding like HSUBFOOLS and his "Gore can still jump in and win it" nonsense.

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 4:14pm

20. Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 4:33pm

    Sure...but making it NOW...comes off as somebody who has to "run negative" because they're losing.

    Your boy has gotten a free ride up till now.----Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 4:35pm

    I'm sorry, did you just call Senator Obama..."boy"?

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 4:45pm

21. Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 4:54pm

    True, but you think it's a good idea to throw around the term "boy" in reference to a 46 year old MAN of....African-American descent?

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 4:58pm

22. If Barack Obama gets the nomination, the republicans will have succeeded in holding the WH and the only change that will take place for the next four years will be that Rudy Guiliani will be occupying the Oval Office instead of Dubya. Count on it.

    FRANKGRITS,

    Giuliani has WORSE negatives than Hillary! How is the guy who has wrapped himself in the American flag and 9/11 going to get around the fact that this was a fraud, as even the firefighters and police in NYC feel exploited by Giuliani and are "publicly" talking about it.

    Remember this in the coming year: Karl Rove wants another divider so he can engage in "divide and smear" politics, but Karl's secret fear, his political nightmare, is to face a "uniter" like Barack Obama because Obama's unity message trumps divide and smear, and Karl knows it"

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 5:01pm

23. FRANK, you have to admit (or maybe not) that this is an interesting turn of events. The Clintons - victims. That's pathetic.

    Personally, I liked Bill Clinton as president. But Hillary is not Bill.

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 5:07pm

24. Ari Melber 12/15/2007 The Nation

    '...In a wide-ranging interview with Charlie Rose, Bill Clinton suggested Obama was a risky and inexperienced choice. "When is the last time we elected a president based on one year of service in the Senate before he started running?" Clinton asked, arguing that voters who back Obama are "rolling the dice." "In theory, we could find someone who is a gifted television commentator and let them run," he added.

    'Don't criticize what you can't understand.' - Robert Allen Zimmerman (Bob Dylan) 'Paredon!' - Ernesto 'El Carnifero' Guevara............................ ..................................... .. 'Lan Astaslem' - T-shirt, protestor at WTC rally

    Posted by HonestLiberal at 01/08/2008 @ 5:13pm

25. Is Karl Rove working for Giuliani?

    Posted by Hman23 at 01/08/2008 @ 5:26pm

26. Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 5:10pm

    FRANKGRITS,

    If you think all Giuliani has to do is win NY and NJ, then you know A LOT less about political strategy than you think.

    You and the Clinton folks are still working with "yesterday's politics". Barack Obama is going to realign the political map so that yesterday's politics is, yesterday!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 5:50pm

27. That's not Hillary's fault and to hold that against her is just plain wrong.

    FRANKGRITS,

    You still aren't getting it. It is not about Bill, it is about Hillary. The only way Bill comes into play is because of Hillary trying to ride off Bill's experience. And this my friend, IS HER FAULT!!!

    If she quits this experience nonsense and acknowledges that she has no more experience than Obama, then Bill fades to the background. Then she would be free to run a positive campaign about what "constructive change" she is going to implement as president, and not the destructive non-change of yesterday's politics.

    But I probably shouldn't be giving you guys free advice, since Obama really is the real deal and is our best hope for a progressive America.

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 6:00pm

28. FRANK,

    With all due respect, why do you think HRC can beat the GOP machine? She is the most motivating thing they have in their arsenal. You seem to think Obama will be ripped to shreds in the general election, but I think she would be. Everything in Bill and Hill's closet will come out again. The only thing going for her would be a weak GOP nominee. I just don't see where you think she would be so much better than Obama.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 01/08/2008 @ 6:00pm

29. Posted by BLUETEXAN 01/08/2008 @ 6:00pm

    You are right on the money, BLUETEXAN!

    Hillary would be the greatest motivator the Republican party could hope for to get their base to the polls. And turnout at the polls determines election outcomes.

    Obama does not provide this source of motivation for Republicans, and as I already said, he is going to take 20% of their vote with progressive and moderate Republicans.

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 6:12pm

30. Posted by METTEYYA 01/08/2008 @ 6:12pm

    You don't think a black man running for President isn't going to help the Republican party get their "base" to the polls? Care to review the RNC's tactics used on Ford in Tennessee in 2006? You need to snap out of that dream if you think only Hillary is going to galvinize the Republican base. Hillary's problem is a significant portion of Democrats hate her (all simplified claims of Democratic sexism aside); it has nothing to do with Republicans.

    Posted by srjenkins at 01/08/2008 @ 6:52pm

31. I'd advise everyone to read 'A Living History', Hillary's autobiography and learn the details of the WH years from an eyewitness view.----Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 5:13pm

    You mean if we read Hillary's autobiography we'll learn how great she is????

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 7:12pm

32. Posted by JOMAMMA 01/08/2008 @ 7:12pm

    Obama may be hard for Republicans to beat - but then again, practically anyone is going to be hard for Republicans to beat. The Republican field is terrible.

    Voting for someone because they are black or a woman is just as racist and sexist and not voting for them for the same reasons. Racism isn't dead in this country. The only people that can say that are white men who never experience any. Ask an ethnic minority, ask a white man in an inter-racial relationship. You'll get a very different perspective.

    Posted by srjenkins at 01/08/2008 @ 7:32pm

33. Posted by SRJENKINS 01/08/2008 @ 6:52pm

    Barack ain't no "single playboy's club" Harold Ford!

    Barack is a family man and has quite a different approach to Ford, who is the head of the DLC. Barack is bi-racial and has a white mother from Kansas. Barack is also not running as a "black candidate", and is smart enough not to fall for race-baiting.

    Only the far-right fringe (10-20%) of the Republican party is going to vote against him because he is not 100% white, but they would not be as motivated to go to the polls to vote against Barack as they would Jesse Jackson, for example, if Jesse were the Democratic nominee.. I say write off these voters but don't motivate them by playing the "race politics" of Jesse or Sharpton. You know you are not going to get these people to vote for you, so the key is not to motivate them to vote against you by going for the race-bait.

    And the smear of Ford only worked because Ford was running a "holier than thou churchboy" campaign which left him open to that kind of "partying at the playboy mansion" attack.

    But back to the central point about who motivates the opposition the most to get to the polls, it is Hillary.

    We are talking about 50-70% of Republicans that simply hate her and Bill Clinton. Such a high negative means she would force the Democrats to run the same old divisive campaign of the past, and that is why she was stressing her newfound hope of winning the "old" swing state of Ohio to Iowan voters (God, that was stupid!).

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 7:35pm

34. I've always said that the republican party has to be destroyed. barack Obama isn't going to do that. Hillary is. This wave will subside and Hillary will regain her momentum before Feb. 5th.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 7:24pm

    Frank,

    Hillary is Bush lite. I don't think many people would disagree with that. Do I think Obama is substantially different that HRC? I'm not sure. Personally I think Obama is being a lot more moderate that he really is. Once elected, he'll trend more liberal. Your love-fest for HRC is really amazing. I'm beginning to wonder if you don't work in her campaign.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 01/08/2008 @ 7:40pm

35. And please don't question my knowledge of politcs. You don't know me.

    FRANKGRITS,

    I didn't question your experience or knowledge, I questioned your JUDGMENT!!! Sound familiar?

    If you say all Giuliani has to do is win NY and NJ, you are smoking the same funny cigarettes as Mark Penn who thought trotting out the "Ohio" governor to "Iowan" voters as his closing argument was a winner!

    What a stupid asshole, who like you, may have lots of knowledge and experience!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 7:41pm

36. This is interesting...

    "There's too much money invested in Hillary...."----Posted by FRANKGRITS 01/08/2008 @ 7:17pm

    Hmmm....wonder whose?

    Posted by Mask at 01/08/2008 @ 7:43pm

37. Just had a bit of a reality shock. I don't like Obama or Clinton, but with 8% in Clinton has a lead, and I am a lot more upset by the prospect of her winning than I was when Obama won Iowa big.

    Does do to remember that it is 100% that she will be a far right democrat, and some lower percentage chance that Obama will be (still significant chance though.)

    Posted by dentedpat at 01/08/2008 @ 7:47pm

38. FRANK, why on earth would anyone need to read a book (edited, of course) on Hillary to understand her?

    The republicans are salivating to have her as the Dem candidate because there is so much dirt on her and Bill that they'll have a field day. Especially since they won't release their papers.

    I would imagine Obama is scary because he's pretty much an unknown. There's only so much mud that can be slung on someone with such a small track record.

    I have no doubt Hillary will win some states here and there but her message isn't one our contemporary society wants to hear. They see her and remember Bill. Like I said before, I liked Bill and had no problem with his whole BJ affair. Good on him as far as I'm concerned. But that time has passed and folks don't want to hear about it anymore. Which is exactly what they'll get with Hillary. Again, there is a ton of dirt on her that in my opinion, will draw people out to vote against her in the general election. I DON'T want another republican president after the nightmare that is GW Bush.

    I'm not voting for Obama in the primaries but if Hillary wins the primaries and goes on to the general, I won't be voting democrat this year. I'm passionate enough about my future that I don't want my voice (vote) to go to Hillary who is a corporate shrill just like anyone the republicans will set up.

    The more I read your posts, the more I actually have to agree with JOMAMMA that waterboarding has happened and it is torture. Torture for us readers that you've been the victim of a political ploy that has got you sucked in, hook - line - and sinker.

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 7:55pm

39. Show me an electoral total where Obama doesn't pick up any southern states or any red states in general and loses NY and NJ and still wins.

    That's the problem with your analysis, FRANKGRITS: Obama can win some "formerly" red states, but Hillary cannot!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/08/2008 @ 8:02pm

40. Posted by JOMAMMA 01/08/2008 @ 8:01pm | ignore this person

    Yeah, I'm thankful I'm not republican - especially this year. The republican field is pretty bad. My parents were republican and I remember growing up that there was usually a "clear" candidate that ran away with the nomination. Not this year. You have my sympathies. :)

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 8:24pm

41. Re: Carville and Begala. That's is great. Tell me who are your friends. Let's just say that it's Begala who is a native Texan but from day one warned us about the dangers of a Dubya's presidency.

    Posted by HelenDAO at 01/08/2008 @ 8:39pm

42. FRANK -

    My question re: Rove was directed to METTEYYA. But, yeah, I'm serious. A lot of posts about Rove this and Rove that I did not know he was on someone's staff.

    Posted by Hman23 at 01/08/2008 @ 8:49pm

43. You have that right as an American. Just remember that every soldier who dies for your right to vote dies in vain if you don't.

    FRANK, I never said I wouldn't vote. I'd be interested in the independent ticket but I really don't want to do that either. I'm not going to vote for whom I think would do the least amount of damage. I'm tired of voting that way. And by the way, I'm active duty with over 17 years of service. So I know far too well the importance of voting.

    Your parents were republicans? That means they voted for Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. This explains alot. I suppose you're a Red Sox fan too.

    Yeah, they probably did. At least they raised me to be a free thinker, which is why I've never voted republican. I don't like baseball at all - too boring. If I did, I'd have to go for one of the teams from Texas since that is where I was raised.

    Are red sox fans republicans?

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 8:55pm

44. The republican party is the party of the rich and the corporations. The democratic party represents the people.

    Sorry FRANK, I missed this part. I agree with you here.

    Hillary's cause is to elevate the middle class and to take care of everyone. She will tax the hell out of the rich and get back all that Dubya gave away.

    I don't see this happening. Those rich folks are already being taxed pretty heavily (enough, I don't know) and are pretty smart about hiding their money from the IRS. If she elevates the middle class, would that elevation move them to a tax bracket that she want's to increase? I heard/read somewhere that her minimum was $200,000 per year income. A lot of middle class businesses make this - electricians, plumbers, etc. So if she taxes them and they don't have the ability to redistribute and hide funds like the supra wealthy, who gets shafted? I'll honestly admit that economics is one of my worse subjects so I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts here.

    You have your own mind to make up.

    Don't we all. :)

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/08/2008 @ 9:04pm

45. Posted by METTEYYA 01/08/2008 @ 7:35pm

    People that care about race aren't too into doing fractions. If he looks black, he's black, and if you don't think race baiting is going to occur and have some limited success, you are living in fantasy land.

    As I said before, the problem is not that Hillary unites Republicans. It's that she divides her own party.

    Posted by JOMAMMA 01/08/2008 @ 7:50pm

    I thought your position was that Bush wasn't a conservative, which I believe is true. No conservative would have put together a federally mandated set of educational standards like "No Child (or recruiter) Left Behind".

    I also believe that progressives and conservatives actually have a lot in common. It's better to think about political position as a circle and extreme right and extreme left (which The Nation doesn't qualify as) actually have a lot in common. Try doing an analysis of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. Lots of common ground in that Venn diagram.

    ...no other society has experienced this in history...

    Another example of unwarranted American exceptionalism. Ever hear of the Enlightenment? Hundred Schools of Thought in China? I can't say that the U.S. in the last hundred years measures up.

    Posted by srjenkins at 01/08/2008 @ 9:17pm