Hillary Clinton was holding a town hall meeting and rally at a high school gymnasium the following morning. With her candidacy thus previewed, we headed to the small town of Penacook to see if we could be half as impressed as her husband claimed.
The gym was crowded, but, according to media reports, it didn’t necessarily need to be. The stage was located 3/4 of the way down the basketball court, with the very back of the bleacher and curtain props situated somewhere near, I imagine, the top of the key. Maybe the campaign was concerned about the image of empty seats – which the press surely would have trumpeted; maybe they simply didn’t expect many people to show up (which in itself is a bit sad – last week’s frontrunner didn’t expect to attract more than 500 people on a Saturday morning). Either way, it gave the Senator an opportunity to show her problem-solving skills as she interrupted her stump speech to find seating for everyone. At the same time, though, it seemed disingenuous, like a planned failure that she could easily solve publicly.
She answered questions on nearly every issue imaginable. More importantly, she didn’t dodge any of the questions, but addressed them completely and thoroughly – first by explaining the issue to anyone in the audience who didn’t know about it, and then by explaining exactly what she was going to do to resolve it. No Child Left Behind was a perfect example. She briefly, but effectively, enumerated a number of problems with the law and its implementation, starting with Bush’s broken funding promises and continuing with a clear explanation of the trap it has laid for gifted and disabled students alike. Her solutions involved more math and science, more room for creativity, and testing that looks for improvement instead of an arbitrary standard.
Her answers to questions about healthcare were also intriguing, because she took several (5 or 6) questions relating to the topic at once before explaining her position and plan. Though she did miss one of the questions (about stem cell, which she addressed later) her ability to answer several distinct questions while still explaining the key components of her health care proposal – itself a complex issue – showed a tenacity of intellect that was surprising given the insane hours the candidates were keeping.
In general, her answers were in line with modern mainstream Democratic thought: bring troops home responsibly, institute universal health care, provide for better education opportunities, and allow the tax cuts on the rich to expire. None of this was much different from Obama, Edwards, or DailyKos.com, despite her reputation of triangulation. Similarly, she did not exhibit the cold compassionless persona that the media has wrapped her in. Instead, while talking about children, for example, her heart seemed open.
While I was impressed, others were not as enthused. Perhaps the wonkishness of her answers bored people. Maybe the length of the exchange – approximately 2 hours – reminded them that the day was slipping away. And, of course, there’s always the possibility that she said something they couldn’t stomach. Either way, by the end of the event, there was a steady, albeit narrow, stream of people making for the exit. As people around us left, they didn’t grumble with displeasure, or anxiously check their watch. Instead, sleepily, (and respectfully) they shuffled down the bleachers until they were out of sight.
Isn’t this their responsibility, though? New Hampshire’s first in the nation status is predicated on their vaunted ability to thoughtfully weigh policy prescriptions, to take the time to really grasp the intricate details of each candidate’s stances. According to this argument, New Hampshire’s voters were by and large unswayed by cults of personality or media distortion. Not all the voters in the crowd left early. But enough did that questions about the underpinnings of New Hampshire’s privilege lingered.
On the other hand, I left her rally impressed with her intelligence and warmth. My girlfriend was converted, but I remained undecided: I still had difficulty believing that Hillary could convince enough Independents and Republicans to establish the mandate she would need to govern into the next decade. She showed that she knew the ins and outs of all the relevant issues, but not that she could defeat the ‘vast right wing conspiracy’ ready to be let loose. I eventually came to the conclusion that Bill Clinton was only half correct: Hillary may very well be the best President if elected, but she was far from the best candidate.
