Clinton pulls image toward the center

LOUISVILLE, Ky. – Hillary Clinton spoke for nearly 40 minutes before she broached the topic of Iraq. But as soon as she brought it up, the clatter of silverware ceased. Her rapt listeners weighed every word, having lost all interest in their chocolate mousse.

These red-state Democrats, roughly 2,000 of them, showed up the other night for many reasons. Some were cool to Clinton but wanted to see a celebrity in the flesh. Others were fans who fear that she can’t win red states in a presidential race and therefore is unelectable – a view shared by many Democrats nationwide. Everyone in the hall, however, was anxious to learn whether she’s in sync with liberals who want a speedy withdrawal, an image that probably would hurt her in the heartland.

In her characteristic monotone, she proceeded to thumb her nose at the left: She opposes a troop-withdrawal timetable (unlike the liberal wing of her party); she won’t renounce her 2002 vote to authorize the war (unlike some of her potential ‘08 competitors); and she believes – like President Bush – that victory in Iraq is essential (“We have to set reasonable goals to finish what we started. … We must deny the terrorists the prize they seek in Iraq”).

For Clinton these days, the big question is whether this centrist talk can ultimately erase her old image (heavily nurtured by the conservative communications apparatus) as a strident feminist lefty and sway independent voters in some of the states that voted Republican in 2000 or 2004 – states such as Missouri, Ohio, Florida, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico. She hasn’t announced a presidential bid, yet many Democrats wonder whether she can expand the Democratic map on Nov. 4, 2008.

Kenneth Baer, a Democratic strategist and former White House speech writer, asks: “Has Hillary become so demonized that she can’t win? This is about trying to convince the swing voters, maybe 10 or 12 percent of the electorate, that the real Hillary is the person who grew up as an Eisenhower Republican in suburban Illinois, someone who internalized the policy failures of the (Bill) Clinton administration and learned those lessons better than anyone else.”

It’s not too early to speculate, because the plot arc of the next Democratic race is already clear. Clinton will raise a gargantuan amount of money ($75 million or more) for her 2006 Senate re-election campaign. If she wins big, she can move the unspent booty into a 2008 account and raise enough new money in 2007 to scare away most would-be rivals. Then, if she wins the nomination, presumably by defeating an antiwar liberal and a Southern centrist – perhaps Mark Warner, the independently wealthy ex-Virginia governor – she would turn her attention to the red-state skeptics.

Talking tough on the war (while still assailing Bush for mismanagement and misuse of intelligence) is one facet of the red-state master plan. Accessing her childhood is another (“I was raised by a father who was a conservative businessman who didn’t believe in credit cards,” she told the Kentuckians). Denouncing Republican red ink is another (Rather than borrowing billions of dollars every week from Communist China, “it’s time we got back to a conservative fiscal policy”).

Her centrist stances don’t tell the whole story; most of the time, she still votes as a liberal. The liberal Americans for Democratic Action, a Washington group, gave her a 95 percent rating in 2004. Nevertheless, she has been seeking out high-profile positions that infuriate liberal activists.

Clinton played this card last week by announcing her co-sponsorship of a bill that would criminalize flag-burning – and was promptly attacked on Daily Kos, an influential liberal Web site, for “a regrettable act of political pandering … it’s becoming clear that Democratic ‘centrism’ is the cancerous tumor on our party.” Antiwar activists, angry with her Iraq stance, are even making plans to disrupt an impending Clinton event in San Francisco.

Hillary-bashing conservatives are impressed by all this liberal anger. They believe that Clinton is playing smart politics; in the words of conservative commentator Michelle Malkin, writing about the San Francisco protest, “Sen. Clinton couldn’t have wished for a better Christmas present than having these loony peaceniks barking about her.” (They are rooting for her to fail because, in their view, she still represents the ‘60s culture brought to Washington by her husband.)

It’s theoretically possible that antiwar liberals, who vote heavily in primaries, could derail a Clinton candidacy – but not likely. In Democratic polls, she continues to top her ‘08 rivals by nearly 25 percentage points, which suggests that her celebrity and her money could trump the qualms of the most vocal activists.

The long-term goal, as Clinton boosters privately acknowledge, is not only to expunge her ‘90s image but also to allay the widespread suspicion (especially among white male voters) that a female Democrat might be reluctant to use military force during a crisis. These boosters cite two hawkish female leaders, Margaret Thatcher in Great Britain and Golda Meir in Israel, as possible role models – especially if Clinton draws a tough-guy opponent such as John McCain or Rudy Giuliani.

But red-staters might not necessarily go along with the Clinton image plan.

Al Cross, a Kentucky political analyst who attended the dinner (a fund-raiser for the state party), said later, “Lots of people down here don’t follow the national news carefully. So even though she has been trying to place herself in the broad mainstream of American thought, they’re not inclined to listen to her. They’ve formed the impression that she’s a big-government feminist, and they’ll pretty well stick with that.”

But if anyone still believes that Clinton will balk at a presidential bid, consider the line she tried out in Louisville. While arguing for an energy policy that loosens the grip of foreign oil, she declared – to thunderous applause – that we should find greater uses for Kentucky coal.

That’s like coming to Philadelphia and eating a cheesesteak. Kentuckians are proud of their coal, and when Clinton brought it up, Cross turned to the guy next to him and simply said, “She’s running.”