The Chelsea Clinton Factor

They used to call her “the child.” Now she may be the secret weapon in her mother’s race to the White House.

The smallest details speak volumes. The stickers on Democratic voters’ cars from New York to Chicago are enough to show how the immense Clinton electoral machine is running at full steam, two and half years away from general election. “Ready for Hillary”: That’s the name of the super-PAC, a political action committee that is not officially affiliated to any one candidate in particular (but a name like that leaves little to the imagination). The PAC has already collected some $4 million and organized fundraising events in Iowa and New Hampshire, the first two states to vote in the Democratic primaries.

Next stop is South Carolina. Every development in Washington is interpreted in Clintonian tones; every slight shift in the Democratic Party is measured in terms of potential advantages or disadvantages for the ex-secretary of state’s path to the White House. All the movements in her widespread network are observed very closely.

Hillary is raising funds. Hillary is organizing her electoral team. Hillary is talking to Wall Street bankers behind closed doors. Hillary is meeting U.N. leader Ban Ki-moon. Hillary is extending her sphere of influence. Hillary, Hillary, Hillary.

When questioned directly about her intentions, Barack Obama’s former secretary of state, who is now trying her hand at law, offers a friendly smile, deflects the comments with irony and courteously spends time talking about the judgments to be made and the decisions to be taken. Fatigue and a desire to withdraw into the more honorable, less stressful side of politics — the side that consists in dealing with foundations supporting exemplary causes with informal diplomacy, with public appearances at $200,000 a pop. These are the recurrent digressions of the ex-first lady who has already gone into the field once before to seize her husband’s seat of power. That time, what was written in the political stars was not in her favor, producing the most unexpected and phenomenal of catalysts for consensus in recent political history: Obama. It was he who showed that the Clinton machine, a rich and tentaculed network that has been patiently woven together, is strong, but not unbeatable. He proved that the Clintons are immensely popular among the Democratic public, but that they are not wholly invincible.

For example, one of the weaknesses in the Clinton machine is a distinctively tribal approach to politics. The machine is for insiders only, for a circle of initiates who offer one another mutual recognition and legitimization, showing the same self-referential tendency as the old establishment. This quality was, quite frankly, not its most alluring attribute for Democratic voters — certainly not for those in New York who have elected an anti-establishment populist, Bill de Blasio, mayor. Ironically, de Blasio is himself the product of a political journey that saw him pass through the extended Clinton family (he led Hillary’s campaign for senator). But to get to the position of mayor he had to construct a political platform that was far removed from the Clintons’ style of politics. He put forward a type of rigorousness and some radical ideas, in opposition to the compromises, the dealings, the balancing acts and the divvying up of power that is daily bread in the Clinton household.

For this reason, Hillary needs to rock the boat. She has to change something in order to avoid falling foul of her past errors. She needs a bridge, between the traditional way of working on the one hand and an evolving electorate on the other. She needs the “C-factor,” meaning Chelsea, the daughter who has moved up the ranks in the last few years and who has shaken things up somewhat, in the domestic political setup. By way of astronomical model, The New York Times Magazine eloquently described the tumult occurring in the Clinton clan: In the Clinton universe there are planets and satellites, stars and meteors. There are those who are destined to turn in the orbit of others and there are other centers of gravity with an irresistible pull.

At 33, Chelsea is a planet in her own right in the Clinton clan. For some time now, she has abandoned the part of the smiling daughter who puts the finishing touches on the family portrait and has assumed instead a role on center stage. Once upon a time, her parents’ advisers called her “the child” — not exactly an affectionate nickname. Today, Chelsea makes decisions about the life or death (political, of course) of those very same advisers. It is said to have been precisely she who was at the start of Doug Band’s marginalization. He was the aide to the Clinton administration whom Bill treated more or less as a son. Suffice only to mention how much money this young talent had scraped together for the Clinton Global Initiative (the CGI is a body promoting global leadership, the ideal institutional framework to facilitate diplomacy and lobbying), and you get the idea of the value of this adviser — some $69 billion. According to the ex-president, it was Band who had had the idea to set up the CGI. Band has now moved into the sidelines, so to speak, although others say that it was Chelsea who made him do so. According to gossip, the adviser had circulated rumors that there was a marriage crisis between Chelsea and investment banker Marc Mezvinsky. The rumors were of course silenced by those concerned, but nonetheless it produced a reaction in the Clinton universe.

Chelsea chops heads, she makes decisions, she sets the tone, she criticizes venerated political policies and she shows, with a cruel courtesy, the door to those who digress. Often these are the very same people who used to call her “the child.” Even the Clinton Foundation, another political and financial platform that has been floating around in the Clinton universe for some time now, has been completely remodeled by Chelsea. In this case, Bill’s heir chose her friend, Eric Braverman, as director. But the very same Braverman was soon removed by his defender, because of a certain fondness for the promotion of his own name over that of the foundation. She brought him back into orbit in a flash.

Chelsea, moreover, now has a galaxy of her own. She has her own cabinet, a real communications office, political advisers and all kinds of political strategies. There are even voices saying that all this energy might be the prelude to her personal aspirations to a deputy position that has been left vacant. But her spokespeople deny all rumors with a smile. Put simply, Chelsea is moving down a track that is already much beaten, that much is certain. But she may also be precisely what is needed to galvanize the innovation that Hillary so needs if her political machine is to work as it should.

The news that, next March 11, it will be she who handles one of the key political appearances at the South by Southwest festival is not insignificant. Since 1987, the music, cinema and technology festival has attracted hundreds of thousands of people to Austin, Texas each spring. It has become an important meeting point for the young electorate whom the Clinton machine, so powerful but also so inflexible, works tirelessly to attract. It was at this very festival that Obama overtook Hillary in the Democratic primaries in March 2008. Six years later, Chelsea could be the trailblazer toward a new dimension of the Clinton universe. Furthermore, it is precisely this new dimension that Hillary needs in order to move away from her déjà-vu policies that seem to still be turning up their noses at those of Obama. Comments from the president’s advisers, gathered by the site BuzzFeed, reveal a certain sense of skepticism with regard to the first signals given by Hillary, signals which only seem to confirm the inevitability of her campaign. “If not me, who?” is the message that Hillary seems to have communicated so far.

A safe bet, as a political message. It may even be effective. But will it be enough? Many have their doubts. The last time that she sent this message to the voters, things didn’t end very well for her. It would be better to concentrate on the so-called C-factor as a way of sharpening the political weapons of her main adversary. As it was so well-expressed by Time, “Hillary Clinton is her own worst enemy.”