It could be the campaign equivalent of a sucker punch. While stumping for her mom yesterday at Butler University, Chelsea Clinton was unexpectedly rocked by the big M-question: Monica. Specifically, did the 1998 event harm Hillary's reputation. Chelsea whipped back a crowd stirring response.
Wow, you're the first person actually that's ever asked me that question in the, I don't know, 70 college campuses that I've now been to and I do not think that's any of your business.
This story of this tough event contrasts wildly with the sunshine-and-light profile of Meghan McCain in today's Washington Post. For these two campaign daughters, the whistle-stops might be the same, but their roles in the spotlight couldn't be more different. To see how, with video of yesterday's gripping event,
Chelsea has famously found her voice this campaign, wowing audiences as a savvy spokeswoman for her mom, deftly fielding questions at townhalls and college campus Q&As. She's prepped on all of the toughies, from foreign policy to free trade, answering in the compact, confident, and specific style of her mom, with all the charm of her dad. Growing up absorbing the political acumen of her parents, which burst forth in yesterday's answer, it's clear that's the role she's meant to play in this campaign.
Meghan's chosen a different role in her dad's campaign, but one that fits her as perfectly as the five pairs of shoes she totes with her on the campaign trail. In this fun Post piece, Meghan (proprietress of McCainBlogette.com — an online diary and scrapbook of her experience on the trail) talks about her mom's penchant for Cheetos, and Henry Kissinger's taste in loafers. Not shy about her socially liberal bent — she voted for John Kerry in 2004 — a mildly surprising tidbit she's never hidden. She's working the campaign, solidly behind her dad, with her tilted cap and aviator sunglasses firmly in place.
Do you like one daughter's campaign role more? Do you think they're doing a good job staying true to themselves under the spotlight?