Hillary's Money Speech -- Dan Henninger Comments

A couple of days ago Daniel Henninger, the right wing partisan columnist for the Wall Street Journal, had a column that cited three presidential speeches of note: Nixon’s Checkers, Kennedy’s Houston, and Obama’s Jeremiah Wright.  Which were precisely the same three speeches I cited in calling for Hillary to emulate them with a speech on money.  He also cited a fourth speech, Reagan’s 1964 Goldwater speech calling for people to take a stand.  Henninger’s point was that either Cruz or Rubio needed a big speech against Trump, like the speeches he cited, to change the dynamic.

So I sent him an email:

Funny you should cite the big rescue speeches of Nixon, Kennedy, and Obama, because I did just the same thing last week in my blog.

Except I did the Democratic version, because that is exactly what I think Hillary needs to do.  Actually, I think her dilemma is closer to that of Nixon, Kennedy, and Obama, because she needs a response to a very specific problem - money and politics.  The NKO speeches were also responses to very specific problems, whereas Rubio and Cruz face a more general sense of stasis, and if they made "the speech," it wouldn't put anything to bed for them, I think.

Anyway, take a look for this similar view I have, just on the Democratic side.

Best,

Budd Shenkin

So he responded:

I think you are right about Hillary needing to do that. She personally is incapable of thinking it through but there must be a Ted Sorenson somewhere to do it for her. The Speech refers to a generic blockage in a campaign that needs to be broken. Cruz would have to essentially repudiate much of his campaign so far to give a Reaganesque speech. I think Rubio could do it. I'd at least like to find out. Best, Dan Henninger

So there we have it!  Bob Reich on the Left thinks I have it right, and so does Dan Menninger on the Right. 

Universal popularity, what I always wanted!

Budd Shenkin