Did James Carville reveal secret behind Hillary Clinton's e-mails?
It鈥檚 possible that Hillary Clinton may ask this particular surrogate to stop helping, at least for the moment. It鈥檚 not just that he鈥檚 made one stumble. It鈥檚 also that he鈥檚 living history, a walking, raging embodiment of all the old Clinton uproars.
James Carville, a political commentator known for leading former President Bill Clinton鈥檚 1992 presidential campaign, speaks to attendees of the 37th Annual Mansfield Metcalf Celebration in Helena, Montana March 7.
Alison Noon/AP
Washington
Is James Carville hurting Hillary Rodham Clinton more than he鈥檚 helping her? That鈥檚 the question rattling around the punditocracy this morning following Mr. Carville鈥檚 inelegant defense of Mrs. Clinton鈥檚 use of personal e-mail on ABC鈥檚 鈥淭his Week鈥 on Sunday.
Carville鈥檚 long been a staunch Clintonite and one of the former first couple鈥檚 primary surrogate spokesmen on television. He鈥檚 been all over the cable shout shows ever since news broke that as Secretary of State Clinton relied on a home-brew private e-mail server. His primary line: it鈥檚 nothing, just business-as-usual; something Colin Powell and other Secretaries of State did too.
鈥淚t鈥檚 made up. You take pi, you subtract 3.1415 and you don鈥檛 end up with very much,鈥 Carville told ABC鈥檚 George Stephanopoulos on Sunday.
聽But Carville also said this, in a rare unguarded comment: 鈥淚 suspect she didn鈥檛 want Louis Gohmert rifling through her e-mails, which seems to me to be a kind of reasonable position for someone to take.鈥
Republicans pounced on this as an inadvertent admission that Clinton was just trying to avoid legitimate congressional oversight. You see, Representative Gohmert is a GOP member of the House from Texas, a member of the Judiciary Committee who鈥檚 an outspoken conservative. To put it mildly.聽
Clinton might want to avoid Gohmert鈥檚 scrutiny, but as an administration official she鈥檚 not really supposed to do that, at least as far as members of Congress are concerned.
At the least, this is a sensitive subject that the Clinton camp would want Carville to avoid. Instead, he should have gone on a trademark rant, where he becomes red in the face and fires out an emotional defense of his subject in the Louisiana accent that earned him the nickname 鈥淩aging Cajun.鈥
As performance art these rants are really quite impressive. But his offhand comment will give Republicans a talking point they鈥檒l be waving around for days.
鈥淭eam Clinton is going to have to ask their surrogates to stop helping, and soon. At this rate, Clinton鈥檚 backers are going to help her right out of the race,鈥 writes Noah Rothman at .
We agree with that first sentence, partly. It鈥檚 possible that Clinton may ask this particular surrogate to stop helping, at least for the moment. It鈥檚 not just that he鈥檚 made one stumble. It鈥檚 also that he鈥檚 living history, a walking, raging embodiment of all the old Clinton uproars, up to and including impeachment.
That鈥檚 not the image Clinton wants to dwell on when she runs for president. She鈥檒l want to portray herself as modern, forward-looking candidate. Remember, her likely campaign manager Robby Mook is 35. Clinton is reaching for younger, tech-savvy leadership for her 2016 effort.聽
As to whether the e-mail uproar will upend her ambitions, and drive Clinton from the race, we remain unconvinced things are anywhere near that point. This is a classic partisan uproar, in which D.C. elites pay lots of attention, but the public doesn鈥檛, with the bottom line being that committed partisans are made more committed in their beliefs, on both sides.
On March 9, found Clinton鈥檚 e-mails to be only the fifth-most followed news event of the week, a tick below the Supreme Court argument on the Affordable Care Act. Even this rating was based mostly on great interest among Republicans, who aren鈥檛 going to vote for Clinton anyway.
Thirty-four percent of Republicans said they were following the story closely, according to Pew. The corresponding number for Democrats was 16 percent. That was the widest partisan divide on any news story rated in that particular Pew survey.