 |
| On CNN Sunday |
Amy Klobuchar has not given up. She may actually be running for President.
She spiced up her "look." Showtime.
Amy Klobuchar's story starts with Pete Buttigieg. She needs to displace him.
Buttigieg is leading in Iowa. Her election story is that she is a good, safe generic Democratic woman who can win back the Midwest for Democrats. She needs to win in Iowa to prove her case.
Buttigieg is leading in Iowa. Her election story is that she is a good, safe generic Democratic woman who can win back the Midwest for Democrats. She needs to win in Iowa to prove her case.
His riposte to Warren--you too, hypocrite--hurt her but didn't help him. Perhaps more important is that the liberal media jumped all over this meme, with story after story in the Huffington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, and Washington Post about wine caves, crystal, $900 bottles of wine, and big donors. This hurts Buttigieg.
The media hits continue.
Some donor bundler wrote something about getting aboard early. Headline: "YIKES: DAMNING PETE FUNDRAISER EMAIL LEAKS."
The debate and a friendly media environment opened the door, and Klobuchar is making her move. She is defining herself as the experienced Midwesterner, the one who (unlike Buttigieg) actually won statewide, and that inexperience is dangerous. She defines Trump's failure as proof that inexperience is dangerous.
She is also demonstrating that she is a healer, with gracious acknowledgement of legislative successes of Biden, Sanders, Warren, and off-stage Booker and Harris. This is not necessarily vice presidential talk, although that would be Plan B. Her presidential hope is to be positioned as a unifier in victory, the candidate on stage who felt so confident she could praise others in the competition.
Graciousness and magnanimity are signs of strength.
She changed her wardrobe. She had a second-banana look in Iowa in August. Now, she is dressing in solid, power colors.
Here she is this week, in maroon and black.
She changed her makeup. She is in full Fox News style war paint now, with more lipstick, more color. I don't pretend to understand women and makeup, but whatever is going on was done with intention. Her earlier look had been dowdy. There was an element of being the smart but plain girl at the back of the room, the girl who knew the answer but didn't raise her hand.
Now she is stepping up.
On CNN: "I just think that the fact that someone has experience can be a really good thing right now when we have a president who went in there with no experience and has done nothing when it comes to helping regular people."
It is not full-power male-style words of confidence. Her starting with "I just think that. . . " denotes diffidence, as if she needs to insert that she doesn't want to offend anyone, by adding the "just."
Trump does not say he "just thinks" anything. He knows what he thinks so he says it. He is entitled. If you don't like it, tough.
Possibly "just think" is second banana thinking. But possibly this is the way a woman needs to express strong leadership to avoid seeming shrill or bossy or bitchy--accusations made about Hillary in 2016 and Warren now. As Klobuchar noted, female candidates face special problems men do not.
Possibly what we are witnessing is exactly what a skilled female leader needs to thread the needle of assertiveness. "Minnesota nice" is a thing. She is strong, but not shrill.
In August this blog noted that Warren was acting like a star and Klobuchar like a warm-up act.
No longer. It's showtime for Klobuchar.
Some donor bundler wrote something about getting aboard early. Headline: "YIKES: DAMNING PETE FUNDRAISER EMAIL LEAKS."
 |
| In Iowa in August |
Graciousness and magnanimity are signs of strength.
She changed her wardrobe. She had a second-banana look in Iowa in August. Now, she is dressing in solid, power colors.
Here she is this week, in maroon and black.
She changed her makeup. She is in full Fox News style war paint now, with more lipstick, more color. I don't pretend to understand women and makeup, but whatever is going on was done with intention. Her earlier look had been dowdy. There was an element of being the smart but plain girl at the back of the room, the girl who knew the answer but didn't raise her hand.
Now she is stepping up.
 |
| In Iowa this week |
It is not full-power male-style words of confidence. Her starting with "I just think that. . . " denotes diffidence, as if she needs to insert that she doesn't want to offend anyone, by adding the "just."
Trump does not say he "just thinks" anything. He knows what he thinks so he says it. He is entitled. If you don't like it, tough.
Possibly "just think" is second banana thinking. But possibly this is the way a woman needs to express strong leadership to avoid seeming shrill or bossy or bitchy--accusations made about Hillary in 2016 and Warren now. As Klobuchar noted, female candidates face special problems men do not.
Possibly what we are witnessing is exactly what a skilled female leader needs to thread the needle of assertiveness. "Minnesota nice" is a thing. She is strong, but not shrill.
In August this blog noted that Warren was acting like a star and Klobuchar like a warm-up act.
No longer. It's showtime for Klobuchar.
 |
| New look. |
3 comments:
Peter Sage always focuses on the superficial. Looks, hair, dresses, make-up. How about focusing on Klobuchar's political positions?
In reality, Klobuchar is not much different than Buttigieg or Warren. They are all interchangeable. They all have the same agenda. Why vote for Klobuchar? Because of her dress and make-up? The fact that Sage doesn't tell you what she'll do for Americans means that she has nothing on her plate. What did Klobuchar champion in the Senate, other than party politics?
It's becoming increasingly clear that while winning the White House is paramount, the real struggle will be to dislodge the Republicans from Congress, or gridlock will continue. Sen. Klobuchar is a competent legislator and an excellent representative for her state, but her style and policy positions raise doubts about whether she can lead this effort.
She may do well in Iowa, but anything but a top three placement will likely end her campaign. Currently she is polling 6th at around 6%., ten points under Sen. Warren.
What is interesting, and somewhat puzzling, is the continuing success of "Mayor Pete" in Iowa polls, while still in single digits nationally. I suspect it is the "Obama Effect" of a newcomer with impressive communication skills, but a very fuzzy message. I'm fairly certain that while a strategy of steering clear of direct confrontation with Trump and the enablers with lofty rhetoric may be attractive in the primary, it won't be effective when the full force of the Regressive media is trained on the candidate.
One thing is certain, whomever is chosen will absolutely need the kind of solidarity that Democrats haven't shown....well, ever.
Many men support Klobuchar...most of them her ex-boyfriends (LOL).
(I didn't say it, she did.) Mayor Pete has provided us with a great litmus test for true progressives: "Is it okay for a millionaire's or billionaire's child to get free public college funded by we the taxpayers?" Those who fall for this loaded question miss a few things: First, and most obvious is "how many of the wealthy send their kids to public schools?" Second, anyone concerned about free college for rich kids has been successfully indoctrinated in our "pay to play" system that has eroded our commons and our sense of community over the last forty years.
Post a Comment