Bloodless Coup

Hilzoy Takes on Clinton's "Experience" and "Competence"

These are topics where Clinton is regularly praised, but is her reputation built on that much? Just what is her "experience" that she says makes her vastly better prepared to be president than Barack Obama?

Those 35 years of experience have always been a bit murky to me. Hillary Clinton's seven years in the Senate have been pretty undistinguished. Fifteen earlier years were spent working full-time as a corporate lawyer, and while Clinton served on various worthy boards and panels during that period, and by all accounts did quite well on them, it's hard to see how much time she could have spent on them while also having a full-time job. Eight were spent being first lady, during which time her major undertaking was the catastrophic attempt to get health care reform passed. And while I do give her full credit for the two years she spent working for the Children's Defense Fund, and the Watergate Committee, I've always been a little puzzled by the idea that I should vote for Clinton because of her experience.

Me too. But it seems a better argument than her claims of breath-taking competence and ability to get things done. Honestly, the reports that've come out in the last week about the Clinton campaign scare me. iI would appear that the Clinton's decision-making style is really quite problematic, and the way her campaign's been run is all too reminiscent of some of the most poorly run White Houses's in recent years.

Rewarding incompetent people because they are loyal is bad. But rewarding incompetent people who lie to the public and to your donors is worse. Lying to the public is both wrong and stupid: it brings your name into disrepute, and that's not good for anyone, least of all a politician. Lying to your donors is also wrong and stupid: wrong, since you presumably ought to feel some loyalty towards the people who have donated to your campaign, and stupid because they are the last people on earth whose trust you should abuse. Solis Doyle's performance in 2006 should have meant that she was not hired for any position of responsibility ever again. Instead, Hillary Clinton made her campaign manager.

This is all to reminscient of Giuliani, Bush the Younger, Rice, etc. Even if you like her policies positions, if this is how she'd run and organize Washington I wouldn't be too confident about her achieving her aims.