Clinton Has Become A Conservative Populist

The New Republic: Candidate Has Undergone A Transformation In Recent Weeks

(The New Republic)  This column was written by Jonathan Chait.

---

The dying days of the Hillary Clinton campaign have brought the breathtaking spectacle of a candidate lashing out at every element of public life that has nourished her career. The über-wonk has disparaged economists and expertise. The staunch ally of black America has attacked her opponent for lacking support of "working, hard-working Americans, white Americans." People who thought they knew Hillary Clinton have gazed in astonishment: What has she become? The answer is, a conservative populist.

Conservative populism and liberal populism are entirely different things. Liberal populism posits that the rich wield disproportionate influence over the government and push for policies often at odds with most people's interest. Conservative populism, by contrast, dismisses any inference that the rich and the non-rich might have opposing interests as "class warfare." Conservative populism prefers to divide society along social lines, with the elites being intellectuals and other snobs who fancy themselves better than average Americans.

Consider this analysis recently offered by Bill Clinton in Clarksburg, West Virginia: "The great divide in this country is not by race or even income, it's by those who think they are better than everyone else and think they should play by a different set of rules." This is precisely the dynamic that allows multimillionaires like George W. Bush and Bill O'Reilly to present themselves as being on the side of the little guy. A more classic expression of conservative populism cannot be found.

Historically, the conservative populist's social divide ran along racial and ethnic lines. In recent years, overt racism has all but disappeared from mainstream political life, and even racial hot button appeals like the 1988 Willie Horton ad have grown rare. What remains is a residue of nostalgia about small towns--whose residents are said to have stronger values and work harder than other Americans, and who also happen to be overwhelmingly white. In 2004, after John Kerry declared that some entertainers supporting him represented "the heart and soul of America," George W. Bush embarked upon a national tour of small- and mid-sized cities, where he would say, "I believe the heart and soul of America is found in places like Duluth, Minnesota," or other such places.

Likewise, Bill Clinton recently declared, "The people in small towns in rural America, who do the work for America, and represent the backbone and the values of this country, they are the people that are carrying her through in this nomination." The corollary--that strong values and hard work is in shorter supply among ethnically heterogeneous urban residents--is left unstated. Hillary Clinton's statement about "hard-working Americans, white Americans" simply made explicit a theme that conservative populists usually keep implicit.

Liberal populism is mostly harnessed to a concrete legislative program aimed at broadening prosperity. Al Gore's "people versus the powerful" campaign focused on his differences with Bush over issues like regulation of HMOs and progressive taxation. Conservative populism, by contrast, is a way of exploiting the grievances it identifies without redressing them. It has an ever-shifting array of targets — Michael Dukakis's veto of a law requiring students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, or the rantings of Jeremiah Wright — but no way to knock them down.

Conservative populists sometimes ape liberal populism by promising material benefits to average people. But the promise is structured so as to pose no threat to any wealthy economic interest. George W. Bush offered tax cuts to the middle class, but paired them with far larger tax cuts for the rich, so that, ultimately, the middle class bore a larger proportion of the tax burden.

Hillary Clinton's embrace of the gas tax holiday is a miniature example of the same pattern. Her plan, which rests upon the political principle that high gasoline prices are unacceptable and that the federal gas tax is a burden on hard-pressed Americans, is highly congenial to the interests of oil companies. Yet she presents it as an assault on Big Oil, much as Bush presented his tax cuts as a way to force the rich to pay a higher share of the burden of government.

If economists or other social scientists dispute the conservative populist's claims, that is only because they, too, are elitists. Bush would dismiss objections to the upper class tilt of his tax cuts by picking a middle class family (in this case, the Muellers) and saying, "Oh, some of the sophisticates will say that $2,700 doesn't matter to the Muellers. 'It doesn't sound like a lot to me.' It's a lot to them. That's what counts."

And so, when Tim Russert said that economists believe the gas tax holiday won't lower prices at the pump, Clinton campaign chairman Terry MacAuliffe replied, "Maybe for Barack Obama and for many of your economists, Tim, who you may talk to, you know what, maybe an extra hundred bucks for them isn't a big deal. But I can tell you this, it is a big deal for most Americans."

Social science analysis is the mortal enemy of conservative populism. The liberal populist sees politics as a series of quantifiable trade-offs between competing interests. The conservative populist offers an appeal that can't be quantified: Who shares your values? Who is more manly? (James Carville: "If she gave him one of her cojones, they'd both have two.")

If a liberal populist cites experts or numbers to back his position, that only proves to the conservative populist that he is out of touch. It's the intellectual equivalent of buying arugula from Whole Foods. A Clinton endorser addressed a rally last month, "You didn't go to Harvard! You weren't born with a silver spoon in your mouth!" (Never mind that Clinton graduated from Yale Law School and had a far more stable, middle class upbringing than Obama.) In the liberal populists' world, the locus of evil is K Street. In the conservative populists' world, the locus of evil is Cambridge, Massachusetts.

In Clinton's defense, she obviously does not believe her own social conservative rhetoric. But neither do Republican social conservatives. She is not running for president so she can suspend the gas tax any more than George H. W. Bush sought the office on order to increase the rate of flag-saluting.

One conceit of the conservative populist style is that its practitioners are "real," while its targets are "fake." For years, Hillary Clinton put herself forward as the earnest liberal policy wonk she actually is, while conservatives lambasted her as a phony. Since she started campaigning as the enemy of all she once held dear, some conservatives have started to appreciate her, even lauding her authenticity. The Weekly Standard's Noemie Emery gushed that after March 4, Hillary "began to seem real." Indeed, she is now real in exactly the same way the conservative populists imagine themselves to be.

Jonathan Chait is a senior editor at The New Republic.

[truthyness]

I also come from a long line of Democrats but I have to face the fact that the Democratic Party isn''t what it used to be.

Two things have become evident to me even though they don''t
make any sense at all.

The first one is that the Democratic Party Leadership
knows damm well that if Obama where to actually make
it past the Republicans and get in the White House, the results will be disastrous.

The second one is that the Democratic leadership
is throwing this election.

I know it''s hard to believe. I know it doesnt make any sense. But it''s happening everyday right in front of us, and I can''''t go on telling myself that it isn''t.

[ranger1948]

joyous88
I am not a war mongerer, but if obama gets elected i expect one of two things to happen, his assination or a civil war in this country. I do not want to see either but our country has enough problems already and to elect a racist who is also a terrorist sympathyzer is not acceptable.

[joyous88]

truthyness,

you seem like one more republicon member of the noise machine,

Obama is the best candidate for president in this country

no one in thier right mind would want four more years
of mcBushSame

and clinton has turned into a Rove Republicon, like

Joe Liberman, not worth the time to even vote for them.

get real , vote obama, unless you are a war monger too

[truthyness]

I also come from a long line of Democrats but I have to face the fact that the Democratic Party isn''t what it used to be.

Two things have become evident to me even though they don''t
make any sense at all.

The first one is that the Democratic Party Leadership
knows damm well that if Obama were to actually make
it past the Republicans and get in the White House, the results will be disastrous.

The second one is that the Democratic leadership
is throwing this election.

I know it''s hard to believe. I know it doesnt make any sense. But it''s happening everyday right in front of us, and I can''t go on telling myself that it isn''t.

[ranger1948]

Samthe tvcat
Anopther good point on my statement but maybe i shouyld have been more crude. We had a great economy under Clinton, but who do you think was running the White House while bill was busy getting BJ''S ?

[ranger1948]

McVet
I agree it is probably useless to write our senators since they have shown they are spineless, but it is like giving notice before we have to declare war and have a revolution. I am hoping things can be resolved without a revolution in our country so am trying every possible avenue.

[vernique]

Someone needs to represent the white trash( reagan democrats) that helped the Republicans party severly weaken the unions, and is destoying the middle class, and the economy, The reagan democrats got what they deserve.

[joyous88]

Clinton looks to republicon for me,

but she is far, far better than McBushCain, he''s just another Liar,

Vote Obama for a new deal.

[samthetvcat]

---"The Clintons have their faults like anyone else but at least when Bill left office our economy was doing great. I would hope Hillary could fix the problems we have here at home and with the government"---
Posted by ranger1948

I totally didn''t pick up on this yesterday, but maybe that says something that characteristics of Bill are imputed onto Hillary - like the assumption isn''t necessarily that because Hillary is married to Bill that Bill will be running the show, or that married people are basically interchangeable . . . isn''t it more the idea maybe that if somebody with certain values and characteristics is in close proximity and has access to the decision making process, then they will necessarily be impacting results?

Which maybe lends support to my idea that if you get a proxy who is well-known and trusted enough at a high enough level, people will perhaps accept that substitute as good enough.

Like it''s maybe not Hillary that the white, rural, relatively older, blue-collar crowd is responding to given that she''s urban and white-collar - it''s Bill who has the white, rural, blue-collar, Southern roots. So like given that McCain''s got the same lack of appeal to this ''conservative populist'' set, maybe Barack finding somebody to join his Cabinet who people know and trust will provide voters in these areas with enough of a connection they need to vote Democratic in November (?)

[hypnotoad72]

Why? How? Go back to, um, 1994 and all the pundits were anti-Clinton and especially hated Hillary.

I won''t deny she has made some rational, well reasoned viewpoints. But she has also pandered and almost too much; it''s almost a rabid attempt to keep clutching onto strings?

And, yes, both Democratic candidates have made their mistakes. McCain has made his. Whatever else happens, it is still up to each candidate to convince the people that (s)he is the best choice.

Do I see the Democratic primaries as a breakdown of the party? No. The debates, before racism, sexism, and other _isms were slung like poo from a monkey, were worthwhile. Whether it''s the candidates starting the _ism game, or their supporters... that''s their business. I only want to see America moving forward again, which means we need to choose a strong leader - a leader who can encourage us to do our part. Leadership starts at the top, which is why we''re interested in the first place. So, what can we do as citizens to work with our leaders?

[obamaslady]

Who is more manly? (James Carville: "If she gave him one of her cojones, they''d both have two.")

Well Carville (whom I used to think was quite smart, but have since learned is no more than a "Judas" assigner) just tells me that HRC is truly either a cross-dresser or even a "she-man"! Take your pick! But in either instance, I much prefer the values professed by Obama any day!

[mergatroid_4]

Wow, everyone just calm down ..., geez!

[mcvet]

I wrote my senators last week and told them the American people are tired of waiting for change and if i didn''''t see change by november i would be looking for all new blood to elect to run our government. I hope everyomne else will also write this message to their senators. I do not want to see a revolution in opur country. We already have enough problems.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by ranger1948 at 06:25 AM : May 11, 2008
+ report abuse

What good will that do when ANY moves they make face a LOSER of a PRESIDENT who will VETO it and who''s party is so spineless they will NOT override it?? Bush is a complete and absolute failure as a PRESIDENT and a LEADER of this there can be no question but his PARTY?? There''s one I don''t understand. The PEOPLE couldn''t have sent them a stronger message last election... IT WAS LOUD. Yet the continued to defy the wishes of those people... they continued to back the WORST in our history to the hilt. THEY are the ones that must go!!

[mcvet]

These Nazi Rags are beyond belief!! They are afloat with a motor when you take away the wedge issue. When it becomes PLAIN that smear and trashing will NOT get it done this time, they just wander in and out... never addressing the MOUNTAIN of Problems we face... PROBLEMS that BOTH Democrat Canidates had positions on SO simular than they didn''t even bother to talk about them. Sorry all you swastika huggers... it''s just not going to float this time. Sieg Heil Rush!!

[sharncedar]

This was a funny article - it seems what he is saying is that Hillary is just as much a genuine honest conservative populist as all the others -which means a complete liar who pretends to sympathize with the dumb yokels who imagine themselves in "small-town America" (there is no such thing anymore).

These wanna-be yokels are responsible for Bush and the Iraq war, and basically are a drag. Too stupid for democracy.

[ranger1948]

stn_sage
It has been a wekk since i wrote and i have not received one response and really didn''t exp[ect too. At least they can''t say they weren''t warned that they would lose votes and be voted out of office.

[ranger1948]

stn_sage
I have seen this situation happen in other countries and it could happen in the U.S. I believe obama to be a racist and at least a sympathyzer to the terrorist sincve he sent his cousin in Africa $1.000.000 to help overthrow a govt there. His association wih wright, the church, farakhan, jackson, black panthers and the mobster is too much coincidence to take a chance of his being in the white house. If he does get elected i think there are enough white radical grous that will not accept a black president that will take him out. I am a retired soldier. I fought my war, now i only want to enjoy retirement and make sure the country stays stable so my children and grandchildren can have a great life also.

[stn_sage]

ranger1948 -

First, I hope you get some type of response from your rep.. I wrote one a couple years ago and got NONE!

Second, there''s nothing sacred about any of our elected officials! I''ve said for years, they should produce or be voted out-of-office! So, I''d join you in that effort.

Third, of all the Republicans, I''d say Paul is the most honest! He''s definitely tried to live his life and run his family by those values he espouses! But, he told the truth in debates and extremist GOPers couldn''t stand it!

Fourth, it can''t help but to get worse! We haven''t even hit bottom yet! Some people laugh at the suggestion of a revolution/uprising here in America, but if things got bad enough, it could happen here!

Finally, whereas ''doing good'' was the primary concern of the Clintons'' in the 1990s---knowing they''d get something for it personally. The Clintons'' of the 21st century have CHANGED---and changed a LOT!

NOW,---due probably to what they perceive as the unfair way they were treated while Bill was prez, and how much everbody ''owes'' them (self-entitlement), they are MOSTLY concerned about PROFITING from office! They''ve become nearly identical to GWB!

crat3 wrote:
Obama will crash and burn in November and the Democratic Party will be a train wreck in November. I will vote McCain. McCain will be president and it will be four more years of Bush under McCain. Media tyranny and black racism must be defeated.

Whether or not crat3''s prediction winds up being correct, I find his principled position entirely persuasive. My distaste for Obama and, especially, the institutions skewing the results in his favor is so great that I am willing to pay the price of a McCain presidency to help set my Democratic Party back on the right track. That price will be high but so are the stakes.

[ranger1948]

stn_sage
I wrote my senators last week and told them the American people are tired of waiting for change and if i didn''t see change by november i would be looking for all new blood to elect to run our government. I hope everyomne else will also write this message to their senators. I do not want to see a revolution in opur country. We already have enough problems.