Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina quipped last week that the way to stump a Democrat is to ask them to name something Hillary Clinton has accomplished in her political career – but it turns out this question has also confounded media.
Commentators and reporters have examined Clinton’s more than 20 years in the public eye, and many have come up short when tasked with the challenge of detailing her accomplishments. Some have even outsourced the chore to voters.
Bloomberg Politics’ Mark Halperin, for example, asked a focus group made up of Iowa voters earlier this year to list a single Clinton success.
“I honestly can’t say I followed along [with] everything that was going on,” one self-Identified Democratic supporter answered.
The Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty took a stab at answering the question, but she also failed to list any actual accomplishments. Rather, the Post columnist went on to explain that the Democratic front-runner must define her campaign before her opponents do that for her.
Politico Magazine tackled this topic recently in an article titled, “What Is Hillary’s Greatest Accomplishment?”
Noting Fiorina’s criticism, the article goes on to quote Clinton supporters, including longtime Clinton surrogate Paul Begala, and Democratic strategists Donna Brazile and Hilary Rosen, who praise her for being an advocate for women’s rights and for reportedly getting the ball rolling on the Iran deal.
The Atlantic took something of a different route, acknowledging Clinton’s supposed accomplishments problem, but addressing also the question of whether it’s even fair to ask about them.
“Accomplishments before reaching the White House may have little connection with a president’s success — hi, President Truman! — but as a matter of politics, this line of questioning can’t be so easily dismissed,” wrote David Graham. “Clinton’s entire campaign is built on the premise that experience and accomplishments matter.”
“Unlike charismatic candidates who have campaigned on promises of change — Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan — Clinton mostly stresses her long track record and her steady competence. (Not to mention that she used Obama’s short record in the Senate against him in 2008.) That makes articulating her accomplishments all the more pressing, and her struggles to do so all the more glaring,” he added.
“Sooner or later, Clinton will have to either come up with a convincing way to explain why her track record qualifies her for the presidency — or else articulate some other rationale,” he added.
Slate’s Jamelle Bouie dodged the issue entirely, and argued that questioning a candidate’s achievements is silly if one is looking to qualifications for the Oval Office.
“Few of the people who get to presidential politics do so on the strength of a signature accomplishment,” he said on Twitter. “What gets them there is ambition, political talent, a constituency, and the ability to capitalize on & respond to the wants of party actors. I’ll put it this way: What was Abraham Lincoln’s greatest accomplishment before becoming president? FDR’s?”
Unsurprisingly, right-leaning media has been brutal towards Clinton’s track record as a public figure.
“Hillary’s Accomplishments: A Snapshot of Nothing Much,” read one headline from Legal Insurrection.
The Daily Caller, the Weekly Standard and Breitbart News have all been quick to note the seeming lack of readily available accomplishments to list.
Clinton has brushed off Fiorina’s criticism, saying recently that she is proud of her State Department record.
“If anyone is interested, there is a long list of what I’ve done and I’m very proud of it,” she said. Her achievements at the State Department include, “orchestrating a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and putting together the coalition that led to international sanctions against Iran.”
The former secretary of state has mostly avoided discussing her attempt to “reset” relations with Russia and her role responding to the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya.
“This was just the usual back-and-forth political attacks. The kind of things you get when you are on a debate stage and you don’t have much to say. This was just the silly season,” Clinton said.
But those remarks came after Clinton herself has struggled in interviews to list her public achievements.
When asked in an earlier interview to name some of her successes at the State Department, the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate said, “I really see my role as secretary, and, in fact, leadership in general in a democracy, as a relay race. I mean, you run the best race you can run, you hand off the baton.”
Clinton has since taken credit for a number of State-related issues, including a key concession that she and her supporters claim made way for the White House’s nuclear deal with Iran.
However, as noted by Hot Air’s Ed Morrisey, it may be a bit of a stretch for Clinton to claim that allowing Iranian production of nuclear fuel is her own idea.
“This concession took place over three years ago, which means that the concession didn’t actually accomplish much at the time. Barack Obama and John Kerry had to give up a lot more, including anytime-anywhere inspections to ensure that those limits were respected, especially at military sites,” he wrote. “Besides, the Iran deal has the support of a whopping 21 percent of the American public, so hitching one’s wagon to that star has some very obvious problems.”
“In other words, Hillary wants to claim a piece of someone else’s work,” he added.
The difficulty many have listing her accomplishments has left her open to ridicule, including from Investor’s Business Daily.
“The problem Clinton backers are having is they’re looking at it all wrong. Hillary’s great achievements as secretary of State are easy to find, all around the world,’ the paper said.
“Just look at the unrest in Syria, the collapse of Libya, the rise of ISIS, the death of a U.S. ambassador, renewed Russian aggression,” it added. “Now that is a long list.”
