Hip Hillary

I think Andrew's being too much of a hater about this Hillary video. It's pretty funny:

What's more, if I thought it was actually the case that Clinton would take action on college affordability, climate change, and ending the war that Obama wouldn't take, I would, like, totally be voting for her. But (fortunately) the candidates are in agreement on the first two issues, and (unfortunately) neither of them has really committed to ending the war in Iraq but Obama's larger record gives me somewhat more hope that he'd do the right thing. Mostly, though, it serves as a reminder that I'd be genuinely thrilled to vote for Clinton in a general election . . . the primary dynamics breed a lot of ill-will, but fundamentally there are two good choices on the table here.

Comments

Thank you for saying that.

For a moment I thought that the Most Promising Pundit of the left ever has been co-opted by the Obamabots.

Posted by gregor | February 11, 2008 1:51 PM

good strategy, I think, questionable execution--they're trying the old "hey! we know you don't think we're hip" routine...question: is its resounding unhipness going to send this slightly complex ironic signal, or will it just end up coming across as "we are lame"?

I'd say the latter, myself.....

Posted by nick | February 11, 2008 1:53 PM

Well, for my money, they wasted cash on this piece of dreck. It isn't amusing, unless you want to watch Hillary look pathetically unhip. This is the sort of thing that nerds create - and still don't get why the cool kids despise them.

Posted by zarrel | February 11, 2008 1:58 PM

Thanks for this post. It's nice to see that you, like Mark Kleiman, are grounded in reality, that while you make like Obama more than Clinton you realize that, if she is the nominee, she's a vastly preferable choice to anybody the Republicans is going to offer. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: anybody who follows through on his or her pledge to sit this one out if Clinton is the nominee is really an asshole.

Posted by Brian | February 11, 2008 1:59 PM

That's lame. Hillary's about as hip as my Grandmother's false teeth.

Posted by Wilson | February 11, 2008 1:59 PM

Looks to me like a bad attempt to co-opt the youth vote. The youngsters look like paid actors rather than supporters. The ad itself is ok, but it seems more like a product of Madison Ave than an organic output of the campaign itself.

Posted by ben | February 11, 2008 2:01 PM

I guess I'm a hater too because I was cringing like crazy and didn't laugh once.

Posted by Mike | February 11, 2008 2:01 PM

As a youth (but perhaps a biased Obama supporter) I find this ad to be pretty lame. But I did notice an odd phenomenon happening on the youtube page where every comment absolutely loved the video, and that every comment was from exactly 1 week ago. I also find it weird for a video to have a 2 star ranking and not a single criticism in the comments. Are the so called Obamabots going to the youtube page in mass with the intent to lower its rating? Or are there Clintonbots with a similar objective in the comments? I'm not sure what it is but I just thought something bizarre was going on over there. Either way I still find the video fairly lame.

Posted by DMan | February 11, 2008 2:01 PM

Agreed, it is really too bad that Andrew Sullivan has allowed his abject hatred for HRC/Bill C. to lower the quality of his writing and perspective on the election. At least he has toned down his quasi-misogynist attacks -- that's great. Unfortunately, his general hatred of them renders his work boorish. After 18 months of reading him closely, admiring his work, I've pulled the Daily Dish from my daily blog reading. Can't stand the self-centered, self-righteous harangues. The previous incarnation of Andrew as premier blogger writer-thinking will return - but probably not until after the election and only if HRC does not win! (On that hope we can agree; I'm an BHO fan.).

Posted by chris Darrouzet | February 11, 2008 2:02 PM

Agreed, it is really too bad that Andrew Sullivan has allowed his abject hatred for HRC/Bill C. to lower the quality of his writing and perspective on the election. At least he has toned down his quasi-misogynist attacks -- that's great. Unfortunately, his general hatred of them renders his work boorish. After 18 months of reading him closely, admiring his work, I've pulled the Daily Dish from my daily blog reading. Can't stand the self-centered, self-righteous harangues. The previous incarnation of Andrew as premier blogger writer-thinking will return - but probably not until after the election and only if HRC does not win! (On that hope we can agree; I'm an BHO fan.).

Posted by chris Darrouzet | February 11, 2008 2:02 PM

Hillary, meet fork.

Posted by Bragan | February 11, 2008 2:02 PM

This gets a resounding "meh." You could just as easily plug McCain or Biden or Richardson or anyone into this video and have the same joke.

Posted by calling all toasters | February 11, 2008 2:03 PM

Wow man. That was horrible. You really thought it was funny? I don't have any particular problem with Hilary and this certainly doesn't change that at all but honestly, I thought it was a painfully awkward attempt at humor. Well... whatever works for you I guess.

Posted by brent | February 11, 2008 2:07 PM

chris Darrouzet,

Was Sullivan ever a "premier blogger writer". He sort of a lame conservative version of MY. He produces a few gems once in a while, but so does a giant bucket of dirt. Oh, and real blogs have comments sections.

Posted by ben | February 11, 2008 2:07 PM

I wasn't cringing, but it still sucked.

I don't blame Hillary for that, just whomever she's paying to make her look like an idiot.

Posted by SoCalJustice | February 11, 2008 2:12 PM

Sadly, Sullivan's deranged Hillary agonistes has done nothing to further diminish the "quality" of his writing.

And bad as he is in print, he's even worse -- brittle, childish, condescending -- when he deigns to reply to a reader's letters.

How that fuck ever got a leg up is a mystery to humankind. I guess the novelty of a sexually libertine, HIV+ right wing conservative never gets old.

Posted by Jamey | February 11, 2008 2:13 PM

Question: Did Hillary have plastic surgery to remove her eye bags? I ask because I was watching a documentary on her yesterday and she had some serious baggage a few years ago but now they seem to have been sucked out.

Posted by Missy | February 11, 2008 2:14 PM

Seriously, when I first saw this I could only stand to watch the first 20 seconds or so and assumed that it was a parody of what a Clinton ad attempting to appeal to young voters would look like.

Posted by Bragan | February 11, 2008 2:14 PM

Hey, Jamey...your Mother gives great head. Mad props.

Posted by Leroy | February 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Terrible. And I tried to say so in the comments section, but it looks like they're moderating the comments, which might explain why every single one is of the "omg i love u hilalry!!!! so awesome!!!!!!" variety.

Posted by EarBucket | February 11, 2008 2:27 PM

Matt, you know how FootballOutsiders has a special "Open Thread for Irrational Manning-Brady Arguments" so that stuff doesn't take over every single topic?

I think all the liberal blogs might want to consider something along those lines...

Posted by gustav | February 11, 2008 2:30 PM

No... Not good. It WOULD have worked if she had actually been in it, instead of the Photoshop cut-out. That's the difference between Hillary and Barack, really. It's all about risking looking foolish in front of your audience.

Posted by Matthew | February 11, 2008 2:32 PM

I liked that video too, but I just figured it was because I am in my forties.

Plus I didn't recognize a single person in the will.i.am video.

Posted by KathyF | February 11, 2008 2:33 PM

Can someone explain to me the liberal strategy to "make college more affordable"? It seems to me that liberal policies to throw federal money at higher education over the last few decades have made it more expensive. Have any of you noticed this correlation?

Posted by Fred | February 11, 2008 2:47 PM

I think Andrew's being too much of a hater about this Hillary video.

You don't say?

Posted by Steve Balboni | February 11, 2008 3:01 PM

Why all the Sullivan bashing? I will tell you why he is successful. First, he is prolific. He updates his site constantly with a lot of posts. Second, he does write well, particularly given the volume of his output. When he writes his less topical set pieces or his Times column, his writing style reaches a very high level. Third, his blog's little features work for me. His "view from the window" feature and his posts that relate to art or pop culture almost always are interesting. Fourth, he publishes a lot of dissent, and is not afraid to choose as the dissent of the day the better written pieces -- even when they savage him.

In sum, he is like a good college history prof, who has a clear political bent and does not try to hide it, but who also gives you the other side of the debate includes books on the syllabus that express a diametrically opposing view to the prof's.

He can at times go too far in bashing Hillary, but I, for one, believe that Hillary deserves dislike albeit not hatred. To give just one example from Frank Rich's last column: How does she think she can get away with saying to New Hampshire voters on New Hampshire public radio in October of last year "it is clear that Michigan's election will not count" while saying this year after finding herself surprised at the size of her trouncing in South Carolina that Michigan should count and that she will actually fight for it to count?

A dispassionate observer with no prior bias toward Hillary would conclude that she is unfairly and shamelessly trying to bend the rules.

Posted by RaymondA | February 11, 2008 3:02 PM

I actually thought the low-tech photoshop cutouts were the only thing keeping the ad amusing. I like the one of her with her guitar strapped to her back wearing a late 60's era George Harrison scarf. I think the ad works on a "humor of the pathetic" sort of level.

Posted by drjimcooper | February 11, 2008 3:06 PM

sully will turn on obama if he wins. he disagrees w/ all of obama's compassionate policies. the current fawning worries me since up until his obamamania, most of his posts about black people were about their inherent, genetic inferiority. recently he put up a post questioning the white supremacy he has touted for years. do you think anyone has told obama that sullivan is a racist?

Posted by jay | February 11, 2008 3:08 PM

Ben - I and many regular readers of The Daily Dish have regarded Sullivan as a premier league blogger-writer for sometime. If one reads enough blogs one finds other well-read bloggers reading Sullivan and linking or responding to his positions - usually in enriching ways even in dissent. So yes - imho he's among the 20 or so that are good as it gets, which can be great sometimes. I winnowed down to about 8-10 regular blogs last year after six months of trying scores of blogs. The Dish was among these finalists on my reading list. Last year Sullivan's blog work excelled on the war, on torture, on the Bush's imperial presidency, on conservatism (in the tradition he sees it), his debate with Sam Harris, gay rights/marriage. That he has taken this turn over the HRC candidacy is, to repeat myself unfortunate. btw, it does not help the cause of defeating her. His approach tends to build up the solidarity of women for her, women who are fed up with the way too gender inflected attacks on her. The over-demonization of HRC is not necessary to defeat her- it only makes it harder.

Posted by Chris Darrouzet | February 11, 2008 3:10 PM

I can sum up what is wrong with this add in one word: "shred."

Shred?

Why does every attempt to sound "with it" end up sounding like a 3rd rate knockoff of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

Posted by Matt | February 11, 2008 3:18 PM

so the video (remember what the post was about?) is actually kind of funny, and touches on a lot of little markers that nobody seems to be pointing out.

1. Death Cab for Cutie piano moment right when it gets "sad."

2. Referring to the "return of the guitar solo" by making a pun about the Edge.

3. the backpack that goes with the silly George Harrison scarf. Dude, it's so emo.

4. the reference to "calling my Ex," which is, you know, a mindset of, um, calling the Clintons, or something.

I don't know, I laughed, and I had fun playing a post-modern Simposons-style "find the reference" in all of it. It's a bad parody, which is already a class of humor that lots of people like. Obviously, though, some people f$%^ing hate it.

Posted by witt | February 11, 2008 3:27 PM

Um, is just me, or is the Hillary video conspicuously white? Especially when you compare it to the "yes we can" video to which it's almost certainly a response.

Posted by alex | February 11, 2008 3:31 PM

Isn't Hillary's favorite musical artiste Celine Dion? Now if that's not hip I don't know what is.

Posted by Bill L | February 11, 2008 3:35 PM

it's not just you, alex...."shredding" is about as culturally white as it gets--maybe we've all got it wrong: the ad is really trying to peel thirtysomething white male computer geeks away from Obama: a crafty plot aimed at one of his main demographics!

Posted by nick | February 11, 2008 3:38 PM

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. That was maybe the worst ad I've ever seen. So contrived, so artificial. Not unlike Hillary herself.

Posted by Nick | February 11, 2008 3:41 PM

I'm too afraid of the badness to watch it, but I do think their Sopranos ad from a while back was good, even though it made me laugh because Bill Clinton looked silly.

A dispassionate observer with no prior bias toward Hillary would conclude that she is unfairly and shamelessly trying to bend the rules.

Yes, and you get accused of joing a cult or being "mean" if you point it out. I am just sick of getting flat out lied to.

On Matt's blog the issue of the draconion Bankruptcy Law came up and a Hillary fan argued she didn't vote on it b/c Bill was having surgery.
Actually she voted for it in 2001:

"As a senator, in 2001, she voted for it, but it did not pass. When it came up again in 2005, she missed the vote because her husband was in the hospital, although she indicated she would have opposed it."

And in state after state, liberals of the party are going with Obama and moderates are voting for Hillary.

Hillary canned a campaign manager today but not the head strategist, Mark Penn, who of course worked (works?) for a firm that engaged in union busting.

Posted by Peter K. | February 11, 2008 3:43 PM

The sad part is we have to use Matt's comment section to comment on Andrew's bigoted hatred. Until Andrew can handle a real comments section of his own he will never be anything more than second rate, no matter how well he writes or how many people admire him. Blogging is about dialog and he doesn't allow it.

Posted by bajsa | February 11, 2008 3:45 PM

I'm on the side of those who thought this was pretty awful. I'm starting to understand why the campaign is cash-strapped -> they took my contribution and countless others and made *this*.

It reminded me of Mr. Burns: "Oh, I enjoy all the popular youth trends....piloting motor coaches, collecting dog waste"

What is the message? Hillary is cool because she was in a band she wasn't really in that doesn't really exist? Odd, at best.

Not cringe-inducing, but I kind of couldn't wait for it to be over.

Posted by Gob Bluth | February 11, 2008 3:54 PM

She's laughing at herself, silly young children- something she's supposed to unable to do.

Sigh. Maybe you'll get it when you grow up.

Posted by wobbly | February 11, 2008 4:17 PM

"anybody who follows through on his or her pledge to sit this one out if Clinton is the nominee is really an asshole."

Just the kind of temperate moderated response we've come to expect from Clintonistas. And then they keep wondering why so many rank-and-file are getting disgusted with this whole act. Clinton is not entitled to my vote, she has to earn it - why don't you keep that in mind?

Posted by vanya | February 11, 2008 4:17 PM

First, I thought this was a parody of what a Hillary youth-appeal video might look like.

Then, I thought it was a genuine Hillary video making fun of and downplaying the importance of the youth vote.

Then I realized the horrible truth: this is a genuine Hillary video parodying, making fun of, and downplaying the importance of the youth vote which was intended to be a youth-appeal video.

Posted by Tractarian | February 11, 2008 4:30 PM

His approach tends to build up the solidarity of women for her, women who are fed up with the way too gender inflected attacks on her.

Aside from the possible exception of Chris Matthews, who has attacked Hillary Clinton in a gender-based manner? From where I stand, gender wasn't a large issue in this campaign until Hillary Clinton starting making explicitly gender-based appeals after losing the female vote in Iowa. And race didn't become such an overbearing issue prior to the Clinton's racially-tinged South Carolina campaign -- which had the inadvertent effect of solidifying the black vote for Barack Obama. We have to remember, moreover, that close to 60% of the Democratic primary electorate is female. Her gender is an advantage in this election, and she is attempting to play to that advantage in the most crass and cynical ways.

Oh, and say what you will about Andrew Sullivan, he's one of the best bloggers out there. While his analysis is often more superficial than Matt's, Andrew has a much wider area of interest, a far better feel for the national zeitgeist, and is generally a much better writer. Now, Fallows still trumps all (despite the scarcity of his posts), but we'll leave that debate for another day.

Posted by asdf | February 11, 2008 4:49 PM

Sigh. Maybe you'll get it when you grow up.

Stick it in your ass, Wobbly.

Posted by Jose | February 11, 2008 5:03 PM

the ad gave me the retarded tingles up and down my spine. matt i am going to try hard to forget that you thought it was funny.

Posted by JC | February 11, 2008 5:11 PM

Lame! Not funny. How could someone find this funny in the way it was intended to be? Yikes.

Posted by onceler | February 11, 2008 5:34 PM

It might have been funny if they'd cast people who looked more like rock stars and less like nerdy campaign volunteers. But ugh, that was painful to watch.

Posted by Nathan | February 11, 2008 7:09 PM

Matt demonstrates once again that not only does he not have a clue, he has no sense of humor.

This was possibly the least funny, least comprehensible, most pointless political ad I've ever seen.

They could have reduced it to the last text part of the ad and it would have been infinitely better.

And Matt thinks this is funny.

He must have a seriously British sense of humor.

And as for nerds, I'm a nerd and I thought it sucked big time.

Clinton needs to sack whoever produced this POS.

This is another demonstration of what Gennifer Flowers said: "Bill was born 17 and stayed 17. Hillary was born 40 and stayed 40."

Raise that to 60. I'm going on 59 and I can see this is lame.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | February 11, 2008 7:41 PM

Just about anyone in their 20's will cringe at this.

"The blogs were going crazy!"

Posted by Jeff | February 11, 2008 7:48 PM

As a 20-year old college student (presumably the ad's target audience), this is cringe-worthy. A textbook example of some 45-year old media consultant desperately trying to figure out what is "hip" and "with it" with those crazy young people.

The actor's "The blogs were going crazy!" remark made me die a little bit inside.

The "Yes We Can" video is a good example of something that IS appealing (or maybe it's just because I'm an Obama supporter).

Posted by Matthew | February 11, 2008 10:20 PM

Andrew Sullivan is unreadable ... again.

Posted by Jack H. | February 11, 2008 10:53 PM

Yes, he is. Yet, I read him several times a day. I can't help myself.

Posted by jay | February 12, 2008 9:20 AM

Hillary's shrill tone is nauseating. When I see her on my TV I quickly turn the channel.

Posted by Jay | February 12, 2008 9:43 AM

DO NOT WANT

Posted by jerf | February 12, 2008 4:54 PM