Introduction
In "Chasing Hillary," New York Times reporter Amy Chozick provides an insider's account of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. As the designated Clinton reporter for the Times, Chozick had a front-row seat to one of the most dramatic and consequential elections in American history. This book offers a personal and candid look at Clinton's journey from presumptive nominee to her shocking defeat by Donald Trump.
Chozick's narrative is both informative and engaging, offering readers a glimpse into the inner workings of a high-stakes political campaign and the complex personality of Hillary Clinton herself. Through her experiences on the campaign trail, Chozick paints a picture of a candidate who struggled to connect with voters and the media, despite her vast experience and qualifications.
The Dream Job
In 2011, Amy Chozick landed what she considered her dream job at the New York Times: covering Hillary Clinton and the Clinton family. By 2013, rumors were swirling that Clinton would make another run for the presidency in 2016, and Chozick's assignment took on a new level of intensity. Recognizing the demands of the job ahead, Chozick made the decision to freeze her eggs, putting her personal life on hold to focus on what promised to be a historic campaign.
At the time, Hillary Clinton seemed like an unstoppable force in American politics. With a 70% approval rating and a resume that included roles as First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State, many believed her path to the White House was all but assured. Clinton was known for her involvement in various charitable causes and her strong Methodist faith, which guided her political beliefs and actions.
However, Chozick soon discovered that her dream job came with unexpected challenges. The relationship between the New York Times and the Clintons was strained, dating back to the 1992 Whitewater scandal. This tension made it difficult for Chozick to secure interviews and access to Clinton and her team.
Early Struggles with the Clinton Campaign
As Chozick began her coverage of Clinton, she quickly realized that the campaign's press team, whom she dubbed "the Guys," was not going to make her job easy. Her attempts to secure interviews were met with resistance, and even seemingly innocuous stories drew criticism from Clinton's team.
One particularly contentious moment came when Chozick published a story called "Planet Hillary" in the New York Times Magazine. The article, which featured a graphic depicting Clinton's face as a planet surrounded by her political orbit, was meant to illustrate the complex network of people involved in her campaign. However, it only served to anger many of those featured in the piece.
Following this incident, Clinton's press team further restricted Chozick's access, allowing her to communicate only through the campaign's lawyer, Cheryl Mills. This treatment was demeaning for a reporter from one of the country's most prestigious newspapers, and it set the tone for a difficult relationship between Chozick and the Clinton campaign.
Adding to the tension, some Clinton supporters accused Chozick of using "coded sexism" in her reporting, citing words like "insincere," "inevitable," and "secretive" to describe the candidate. These critics warned that they would be closely monitoring Chozick's coverage, creating an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust.
The Email Scandal
One of the most significant challenges Clinton faced during her campaign was the controversy surrounding her use of a private email server for official State Department business. The scandal began to unfold in March 2015 when Clinton tweeted that she would make her emails public in an attempt to quell growing concerns.
Initially, Clinton downplayed the issue, explaining that she had used a personal email account for convenience and with the State Department's approval. She also admitted to deleting some emails that she deemed personal or unrelated to her work as Secretary of State.
However, this explanation did little to satisfy the media or her critics. The New York Times, along with other news outlets, began to dig deeper into the story. Chozick herself wrote an article titled "What about your emails?" which highlighted the fact that Clinton had deleted roughly half of the emails she sent during her tenure as Secretary of State.
The email scandal continued to dog Clinton throughout her campaign, eroding public trust and providing fodder for her opponents. The drip-drip nature of the revelations made it seem as though there was always more to the story, leading to speculation about whether Clinton had leaked sensitive information or deleted incriminating evidence.
Despite Clinton's attempts to move past the issue, the email scandal remained a persistent thorn in her side, overshadowing other aspects of her campaign and contributing to the perception that she was untrustworthy or had something to hide.
Clinton's Hidden Personality
One of the most intriguing aspects of Chozick's account is her portrayal of Hillary Clinton's personality, particularly the sides of her that were rarely seen by the public. According to Chozick, Clinton possessed a sharp wit and a silly side that often went unnoticed during the campaign.
For instance, when asked yet again about her emails, Clinton quipped that she had just signed up for Snapchat, a social media platform known for its disappearing messages. This kind of dry humor was apparently common in private settings, where Clinton was known to shine at fundraisers and cocktail parties.
Chozick recounts an interaction between Clinton and Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, where Clinton displayed her quick wit in a discussion about international politics. When Blankfein joked that the United States should give New Jersey to China, Clinton shot back that they should offer a red state instead – a clever play on the color associated with both Republican states and communist China.
Unfortunately, as the campaign progressed, this lighter side of Clinton began to fade from public view. The constant scrutiny and criticism she faced seemed to make her more cautious and less willing to speak off the cuff. This resulted in a campaign that often felt stiff and uninspiring, even to the journalists covering it.
The author notes that the press corps following Clinton became so bored that they resorted to counting the number of times she nodded her head during political discussions. This tedium reached its nadir when the New York Times published an article tallying Clinton's 43 nods per minute during a talk on community banking.
The Unexpected Challenge from Bernie Sanders
While many expected Clinton to cruise to the Democratic nomination, she faced an unexpectedly strong challenge from Senator Bernie Sanders. The contrast between the two campaigns was stark, with Sanders' rallies feeling energetic and revolutionary, while Clinton's events often seemed lackluster in comparison.
Sanders regularly drew crowds of thousands, many of them young and enthusiastic supporters. Clinton, on the other hand, struggled to fill smaller venues, with most attendees being over 60 years old. The difference in energy was palpable, and it began to worry Clinton's supporters.
Clinton's speeches during this period were often criticized as boring and uninspiring. In one particularly memorable instance, she gave a lengthy lecture on 19th-century history while campaigning in Clinton County, Iowa. Her attempt to connect the area's namesake, DeWitt Clinton, to the Erie Canal and its impact on commerce fell flat with voters who were more concerned about their current economic situations.
Even Clinton's attempts at crafting catchy slogans fell short. Her line "I would rather underpromise and overdeliver" was quickly forgotten, failing to resonate with voters looking for a more inspiring message.
The unexpected strength of Sanders' campaign forced Clinton to step up her game and showcased both her strengths and weaknesses as a candidate. While she eventually secured the nomination, the prolonged primary battle highlighted the enthusiasm gap between her campaign and that of her more progressive rival.
Clinton's Complicated Relationship with the Press
Throughout her career, and especially during the 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton had a notoriously difficult relationship with the press. This dynamic often resulted in missed opportunities for positive coverage and contributed to the public's perception of her as distant and untrustworthy.
Chozick provides a telling example of how Clinton's distrust of the media sometimes worked against her own interests. The author had spent months researching a story about Clinton's efforts to combat racial segregation in schools during the early 1970s. The story had the potential to be extremely positive for Clinton, particularly among African American voters.
In 1972, Clinton had gone undercover as a housewife seeking to enroll her son in a private school in Dothan, Alabama. Through her questioning, she exposed the school's racist admissions policies, which were designed to circumvent desegregation laws while maintaining tax-exempt status.
Despite the story's potential to showcase Clinton's long-standing commitment to civil rights, she refused to be interviewed on the subject. Chozick speculates that this refusal was likely due to Clinton's general distrust of the press and her specific wariness of Chozick herself.
Even without Clinton's cooperation, Chozick wrote and published the article. Interestingly, it was Bill Clinton who recognized the story's value, frequently referencing it as an example of positive press coverage and expanding on the tale of "Undercover Hillary" in his own speeches.
This incident illustrates a recurring theme in Clinton's campaign: her reluctance to engage with the media often prevented her from effectively communicating her strengths and accomplishments to voters.
Clinton's Religious Faith
One aspect of Hillary Clinton's personality that Chozick believes was underutilized during the campaign was her deep religious faith. As a devout Methodist, Clinton regularly attended services at black churches across the country every Sunday for over a year leading up to the election.
In these settings, Clinton often appeared at her most authentic and passionate. She would address the congregations, quoting scripture and speaking out against racism in America. Her favorite passages included the Epistle of James, which emphasizes the importance of actions over words, and the teachings of the prophet Micah on justice and humility.
Chozick argues that Clinton's religious convictions could have been a powerful tool in connecting with voters, particularly in a country as religious as the United States. However, Clinton seemed reluctant to emphasize this aspect of her personality during the campaign.
This reticence may have stemmed from past experiences. In the mid-1990s, Clinton had been more open about discussing her faith in political contexts. However, she faced mockery and criticism from the press, including a sarcastic New York Times article titled "Saint Hillary: More Preacher than Politician."
The author suggests that this negative experience may have led Clinton to downplay her religious beliefs during the 2016 campaign, potentially missing an opportunity to connect with voters on a deeper level.
Clinton as the Underdog
Despite entering the race as the presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton found herself facing a serious challenge from Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries. It was during this period of unexpected difficulty that Clinton seemed to shine brightest as a candidate.
The Nevada Democratic caucus in February 2016 provided a clear example of Clinton at her best. Tired and stressed from the grueling campaign, Clinton appeared more relatable to middle- and working-class voters. In a memorable late-night encounter at Caesars Palace Hotel, Clinton, without makeup and with messy hair, made an unscheduled visit to the staff area where housekeepers were folding linens.
Clinton's interaction with the hotel staff, many of whom were Latina women, was warm and genuine. She embraced them, took photos, and engaged in conversations about their work and lives. This informal, personal approach continued throughout the Nevada campaign, with Clinton speaking to ice cream vendors, cooks, and even briefly joining a children's soccer game as a goalkeeper.
These moments of authenticity and connection helped Clinton secure a narrow victory in Nevada and ultimately win the Democratic nomination. However, Chozick notes that once Clinton secured the nomination, she retreated once again into a more guarded, perfectionist persona. This shift back to a more distant image would prove problematic in the general election against Donald Trump.
The Presidential Debates
As the general election approached, the televised debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump became a focal point of the campaign. Clinton, known for her debate skills, was expected to perform well against the less experienced Trump.
Despite her prowess, Clinton remained insecure about her debating abilities. Even after strong performances, such as her debate against Bernie Sanders in Las Vegas, she would repeatedly ask her team for reassurance about how she had done.
When the time came to face Trump, Clinton generally performed well. Chozick observed that Clinton easily won all three debates, managing to provoke Trump into admitting that he had avoided paying federal income tax by exploiting loopholes in the system.
However, Trump's aggressive and unconventional debating style often succeeded in throwing Clinton off balance and distracting her from her key messages. For example, at the end of one debate, Clinton triumphantly brought up the story of Alicia Machado, a former Miss Universe winner who had been criticized by Trump for her weight. While this moment was impactful and remained in the news cycle, it also meant that Clinton's core policy messages about jobs, healthcare, and education were overshadowed by discussions of Trump's behavior.
This dynamic illustrated a recurring challenge for the Clinton campaign: while they were often successful in highlighting Trump's flaws, they struggled to keep the focus on Clinton's own vision and policy proposals.
The Shocking Election Night
As Election Day arrived, the mood in the Clinton camp was one of cautious optimism. Most polls and pundits predicted a comfortable victory for the Democratic nominee. However, as the results began to come in, it became clear that something unexpected was happening.
The shock of Trump's victory was profound, not just for the Clinton campaign but for the journalists who had been covering it as well. Chozick describes the morning after the election, when the group of reporters assigned to Clinton gathered to watch her concession speech. For many of these journalists, particularly the women, Clinton's loss represented more than just a political defeat; it symbolized the ongoing struggles and insecurities faced by women in professional settings across America.
Clinton entered the room with her husband Bill, both looking visibly shaken by the night's events. She wore purple, a color choice that Chozick struggled to interpret. Was it a reference to the women's suffrage movement? A symbol of opposition to LGBTQ bullying? Or perhaps, as Chozick ultimately concluded, a nod to Clinton's Methodist faith, where purple represents penitence.
Despite the palpable sadness in the room, Clinton remained resolute in her speech. She quoted Galatians 6:9, urging her supporters not to grow weary or lose heart, as there was still more work to be done. This message of resilience and continued commitment to progress resonated with many in the audience, even as they grappled with the disappointment of the election results.
The aftermath of the election brought a shift in perspective for many, including Chozick herself. The emotional scenes at Clinton's farewell to her staff humanized the campaign team that had often been at odds with the press. Chozick found herself feeling empathy for "the Guys," recognizing them as dedicated supporters who had given their all to a cause they believed in.
Lessons Learned and Moving Forward
In the wake of Clinton's defeat, many Democrats and political observers were left to ponder what had gone wrong and what lessons could be learned for the future. Chozick's account offers several insights:
The importance of authenticity: Clinton's most effective moments came when she let her guard down and showed her true personality. The campaign's tendency to over-manage her image often backfired, making her seem distant and inauthentic.
The double-edged sword of experience: While Clinton's extensive resume was a strength, it also made her seem like part of the establishment at a time when many voters were looking for change.
The challenges of being a female candidate: Throughout the campaign, Clinton faced scrutiny and criticism that often seemed rooted in gender bias. The difficulty of navigating these waters while trying to make history as the first female president added an extra layer of complexity to her campaign.
The power of messaging: Trump's simple, direct messaging often overshadowed Clinton's more nuanced policy proposals. The campaign's struggle to articulate a clear, compelling vision for the country proved to be a significant weakness.
The impact of media coverage: The intense focus on Clinton's emails and other controversies often drowned out discussion of substantive policy issues. This dynamic highlighted the complex relationship between candidates, the media, and the voting public.
The importance of connecting with voters: Clinton's most successful moments came when she engaged directly with ordinary Americans, listening to their concerns and sharing her own experiences. The campaign's failure to prioritize these interactions in key swing states may have contributed to her loss.
The role of faith in American politics: Clinton's reluctance to discuss her religious beliefs may have cost her an opportunity to connect with voters on a deeper level, particularly in more conservative areas of the country.
As Democrats and progressives look to the future, Chozick's account suggests that finding candidates who can balance policy expertise with genuine connection to voters will be crucial. Additionally, developing strategies to effectively communicate complex ideas in a media environment that often favors simplicity and sensationalism will be an ongoing challenge.
Conclusion
"Chasing Hillary" offers a unique and intimate perspective on one of the most consequential elections in American history. Through Amy Chozick's eyes, readers gain insight into the complexities of Hillary Clinton as a candidate and as a person, as well as the challenges faced by women in politics and journalism.
The book serves as both a cautionary tale and a call to action. It highlights the ways in which even the most qualified candidates can struggle to connect with voters and navigate the modern media landscape. At the same time, it underscores the ongoing importance of engagement in the political process and the need for diverse voices in both politics and journalism.
As the United States continues to grapple with the aftermath of the 2016 election and looks toward future contests, the lessons from Clinton's campaign remain relevant. The struggle to balance authenticity with political necessity, to effectively communicate complex ideas in a sound-bite driven world, and to overcome ingrained biases and expectations will likely continue to shape American politics for years to come.
Ultimately, "Chasing Hillary" is not just the story of a failed presidential campaign, but a reflection on the state of American democracy and the ongoing quest for progress and equality. It challenges readers to consider their own role in the political process and to remain engaged, even in the face of setbacks and disappointments.
As Hillary Clinton herself quoted in her concession speech, "Let us not grow weary, let us not lose heart, for there are more seasons to come, and there is more work to do." This sentiment, perhaps more than any policy proposal or campaign slogan, encapsulates the enduring spirit of American democracy and the continued push for a more perfect union.