Maureen Dowd pities the Clintons. The New York Times writer bought an advance ticket to Bill and Hillary's speaking tour, only to find that she probably could have walked in on the day of the event and had no problem finding a seat. She recently recalled the "depressing sight."
I’m looking around Scotiabank Arena, the home of the Toronto Maple Leafs, and it’s a depressing sight. It’s two-for-the-price-of-one in half the arena. The hockey rink is half curtained off, but even with that, organizers are scrambling at the last minute to cordon off more sections behind thick black curtains, they say due to a lack of sales. I paid $177 weeks in advance. (I passed on the pricey meet-and-greet option.) On the day of the event, some unsold tickets are slashed to single digits.
I get reassigned to another section as the Clintons’ audience space shrinks. But even with all the herding, I’m still looking at large swaths of empty seats — and I cringe at the thought that the Clintons will look out and see that, too. It was only four years ago, after all, that Canadians were clamoring to buy tickets to see the woman who seemed headed for history. (New York Times)
Suffice it to say, "An Evening With the Clintons" tour, which is scheduled to make stops in both the U.S. and Canada, is not the resounding success the former first couple had hoped.
"I can’t fathom why the Clintons would make like aging rock stars and go on a tour of Canada and the U.S. at a moment when Democrats are hoping to break the stranglehold of their cloistered, superannuated leadership and exult in a mosaic of exciting new faces," Dowd laments.
Recommended
Perhaps if their tour was for a cause, à la Al Gore's environmental tour, but that's obviously not the case, Dowd muses. Somehow though she manages to come to a conclusion. The Clintons' decision to embark on a tour is that its their way to rewrite history and get back in Americans' good graces, Dowd explained. Unfortunately, as is painfully obvious from their paltry ticket sales, it's not working.
One former first lady who seems to be doing post-White House life right is Michelle Obama. Her "Becoming" book tour is selling like hot cakes and it probably has something to do with both her treatment of her fans and her definition of feminism.
"Where Obama is open and vulnerable, Clinton remains calculating and bitter," Tiana Lowe wrote in an op-ed for the National Review. "Her shtick has long worn thin. Her adversarial genre of feminism is increasingly going out of fashion, and she's not buoyed by her commitment to a husband credibly accused of sexual assault."
Hillary's most recent comments about her husband's affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky scandal lost her even more fans. When asked about the relationship, Mrs. Clinton explained that "no," it wasn't an abuse of power, because they were both adults.
Several other factors can explain why her favorability rating is stuck in the thirties (seven points down from what it was before Election Day 2016), and why with all her political experience she could not beat Donald Trump in 2016.
Still, that may not stop her from trying again.
Until then, she and Bill will be "traveling North America in a bubble, shockingly un-self-aware." Dowd's words.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member