The voice of power

Johannes Hapig: Jennifer Palmieri, you’ve had an impressive career. You served as communications director for both U.S. President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign; you’re a bestselling author, a consultant, and you have your own TV show. Yet your career began quite modestly.

«The President of the United States of America has a lot of power, yes—but very little control.»

While in college, you applied for an internship with Congressman Leon Panetta, who shortly thereafter became Bill Clinton’s chief of staff. Panetta made you his personal assistant—and that’s how you were «promoted» to the White House at just 26 years old.

To be honest, at that age I wasn't particularly thrilled about being someone's personal assistant. I thought it would be a step backward in my career. I wanted to do it for six months at most and see how it went. But in the end, I had the job for two and a half years—and I’ve never learned more in any other role.

You must have made an excellent impression on the Clinton administration, because Press Secretary Mike McCurry asked you to join his team and move from administration to communications.

That was really strange for me because I had no experience dealing with the media. To be honest, I was absolutely terrified of the press (laughs). But Mike trusted me, and I was pleasantly surprised: I started to like reporters! They were very smart and very well-informed. A little cynical, maybe, but I liked that.

She went on to hold various positions within the Democratic Party. Her career progressed steadily until she finally became Director of Communications for the Obama administration in 2013. It was an incredibly challenging role.

You know, people think the President of the United States has an enormous amount of power. Yes, he has power, but he has very little control. And that goes for his team, too: When you work in the White House, you’re constantly confronted with things you have no influence over. Everything that happens in the world can affect your day-to-day work and the decisions you have to make. Events and news come rushing at you from all directions—things you didn’t see coming. That’s why a longtime aide to Presidents Nixon and Ford is quoted as saying that working in the White House is «like playing squash»: When you hit a ball against the wall, it bounces off and comes back. But you don’t recognize its exact trajectory until the very last moment. That’s why providing the president with a consistent narrative always seemed more important to me than chasing after the «perfect headline.».

Could you elaborate on that?

In the White House, you might say, «This week we’ll focus on this or that message,» but more often than not, even the most carefully crafted communication plan is jeopardized by external factors. That could be a dispute in Congress, the economy, or anything else happening on the world stage. That’s why I’ve always asked myself first: «How do we ensure that the President’s fundamental qualities shine through even in his response to current events—whatever they may be?» Consistency is what sticks with people. After all, people only get very fleeting, brief glimpses into the workings of politics—so these glimpses must be internally consistent. Whether the president is speaking about a national security decision, corporate taxes, or foreign policy: every statement, every comment must reflect, on a small scale, what he stands for on a larger scale.

There are, of course, certain prejudices against communications professionals in politics. Some of your colleagues are referred to as «spin doctors» who try to put a favorable spin on the news.

There are indeed people in our line of work who try to act as «spin doctors.» They think they can give a story a new twist by twisting politicians’ words or offering different interpretations of what was said. But I’m a Democrat—and we believe it’s fundamentally important to stay on the side of the truth. As a rule, it’s best to share your honest thoughts with the media and the public rather than trying to hide or obscure anything. My advice to colleagues working in political communications is this: Explain your administration’s actions. Make sure everyone understands what drives you. In the end, you certainly won’t be satisfied with everything the press writes, because journalists, in turn, have their own perspective on things. But at least you’ll maintain your credibility.

The Obama administration used humor as a powerful communication tool. The president appeared on late-night TV and announced his healthcare reform in the form of a blues song. He also agreed to appear on an episode of the infamous show «Between Two Ferns,» among other things. How do you pull something like that off?

We’ve constantly been looking for ways for Barack to break out of an environment where he’s heard only by the White House press corps. Whether that meant appearing on shows like «Ellen» and «The View» or even on a late-night talk show. Sometimes I’ve wondered if certain things might be «too much,» if they might, well, come across as «unpresidential.» But on the whole, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s good for the American president to reflect pop culture—after all, he is a reflection of America. Besides, I’m convinced that while there are no risk-free decisions in communication, if you’re not willing to take risks, you’ve already lost.

Speaking of «taking a risk»: Would you say that’s what you did when you left the Obama administration in 2015 and joined Hillary Clinton’s campaign team?

I could have «wrapped up» Obama’s presidency alongside him, sure. But I had worked for Bill Clinton for several years and weathered many, many difficult situations with him and Hillary. I knew them really well. And that’s why I was confident that I was in a particularly advantageous position to support them. Ensuring that Hillary won was, as President Obama used to say, just as important to the «entire enterprise» as working for him. Incidentally, I still believe today that I was probably better prepared than most anyone else for what lay ahead. Although I never could have anticipated everything that would actually happen.

Because shortly after you started your new job, the field of Republican presidential candidates began to narrow—and Donald Trump took the lead. What did you think of him back then?

At first, I thought, «Okay, the fascination he holds for some people won’t last.» But then Trump made all these incredibly controversial statements. About Senator John McCain, who was held captive and tortured during the Vietnam War, he said: «I like people who don’t get captured.» And that’s when I thought for the first time: «Okay, if he survives that politically, he might survive anything.» We watched the Republican debates; we saw that none of the other candidates was able to stand up to Trump. Some tried to take the high road, but that didn’t work. Others tried to play his game—and that definitely didn’t work either. If I’ve learned one thing, it’s that you can never outdo Trump. We hesitated for a long time before getting involved in the Republican debates, until we finally did. But it was asymmetric warfare. There’s this theory that we wanted Trump as a candidate because we supposedly thought we’d win an easy victory against him. The opposite was true: I was incredibly worried, because Hillary was, after all, a rather conventional establishment candidate, and Trump was unconventional in every respect. That made things much more difficult for us.

Is it because—whether in terms of communication or other areas—you haven't been using the same methods and techniques?

The «toolkit» he relied on was off-limits to us. Hillary represented the absolute antithesis of Trump. Engaging in a «race to the bottom» with him would have been idiotic. Because someone like Trump will always be willing to go one step further. At the time, some Democrats even called for us to emulate the Republicans« style and tone, saying things like, »We have to be like Trump and his people; we have to be nasty, lie, and get our hands dirty.” But I disagreed then, and I still do. Okay, our party can be frustrating because we have internal disputes to work through. We sometimes send mixed messages; we don’t all say the same thing. But: We saved the Republic! And the United States. America is still standing—for now—because the Democrats have remained true to the truth.

«Even though Hillary lost, I think our overall understanding of leadership has broadened.»

When you say that America still exists «for the time being,» do you mean that Joe Biden’s presidency is more of a «hiatus» than the end of American populism?

I think we’re experiencing a breather right now; Biden’s presidency represents a breather. The future, however, lies uncertain before us. America has only been in a similarly precarious situation once before, and that was the Civil War. That’s how serious the situation is, I believe. But I also believe that it depends on how each and every one of us behaves—and I always try to be optimistic. There are certainly a few positive developments: Almost everyone I speak with, whether inside or outside Washington, D.C., wants to bridge the divide that is tearing our country apart. Moderate Republicans feel encouraged by this, and there’s a chance the party will slowly distance itself from the Trump era. So even if there might be a Republican attempt to overturn the election in 2024, as was the case in 2020, I think the American people ultimately want to move forward together.

«Every comment must reflect, on a small scale, what the president stands for on a larger scale.»

In an interview, you once said that Hillary Clinton was only able to show «half of her humanity» during the campaign. On the one hand, because she was the first female presidential candidate in U.S. history and had to be extremely cautious about her public image. But on the other hand, it was also because it was difficult to highlight certain aspects of her personality while Trump was constantly ranting and hurling insults. Will warmth, empathy, and compassion—perhaps as attributes of a future presidential candidate—help win elections?

I can certainly imagine that. Even though Hillary lost, I think our overall understanding of leadership has broadened. And that a progressive candidate—whether a woman or a man—with an agenda of compassion and respect could win. With a perspective that doesn’t look down on people from above, but rather meets them at eye level, signaling: «I care about you, and we all care for one another here in the United States of America.» I believe people don’t just want to feel valued; they also want to be called upon to do their part. They want to show that they can achieve something. They want to prove that they can stand united, even when the darker sides of human nature try to pull us in a different direction.

Your two books, *Dear Madam President* and *She Proclaims*, send a message to women around the world to make their voices heard, face challenges, and bring about change. What inspired you to write these books?

After Hillary’s election defeat in 2016, I wanted to make sense of the things I had done and seen. Joan Didion once said that «we tell stories to live»—and I had these experiences that you simply don’t have unless you were part of the Clinton campaign tour (laughs). I knew what had actually happened there. It had become clear to me that all of us, no matter how progressive we may be, have prejudices in our minds that are built into the system and hold people back. Women, in particular, hold themselves back because they’ve internalized the idea that they must constantly «improve» or that they «simply don’t deserve» this or that. Dozens of times a day, women are told that they aren’t as valuable as men; starting with the sports we see on TV, the music we listen to, the books we read—all the way to the people who represent us in politics. That’s exactly what I wanted to shed light on when I wrote the books you mentioned.

«To be honest, I was absolutely terrified of the press. But I was pleasantly surprised.»

Where should one start when fighting for equality in society? With internalized barriers, or with the economic and political conditions?

We need to work on both. These two areas are interdependent: As soon as women overcome their inner doubts and insecurities, they begin to demand more from the prevailing social conditions. And vice versa.

How have you personally overcome patriarchal structures throughout your career?

I am one of four sisters; I have no brothers. I think that had a big influence on me, because I never experienced anyone in my own family being treated differently because of their gender. So perhaps I was, from the outset, more courageous in difficult situations at work. Nevertheless, I became increasingly aware of the structures you mentioned while I was working at the White House. Of course, I was valued there and had wonderful male colleagues who were committed to my success. But I noticed that they advanced more quickly than I did. I noticed that they were more successful at a younger age. For a long time, I convinced myself that titles and salary didn’t matter to me—as a kind of moral crutch to help me cope. But at some point, I started to fight back and make demands. The same thing happened, by the way, during the Clinton campaign: There was a situation where I was speaking with the journalist Mika Brzezinski—and she very strongly encouraged me to ask for more money for my work. The next day, I went into the office, asked for a raise—and became the highest-paid person on the campaign. Ultimately, it always comes down to what you’re willing to put up with—and what you simply refuse to accept.

«If I've learned one thing, it's that you can never outdo Trump.»

It's about making yourself heard—both figuratively and literally.

Yes. We're simply wired to perceive male voices more clearly than female voices. There were even meetings with Hillary where she would say something, but people wouldn’t react to it. And then when one of our male consultants said exactly the same thing, the team would say, «Hey, that’s a good idea!» (laughs). Those were eye-opening moments. I sat there and realized: I had more than two decades of my career in Washington behind me, and there still hadn’t been a female president. Women made up 18 percent of the U.S. Congress. We have to stop getting in our own way. It’s not as if there are no opportunities at all, but if we women don’t finally realize that we deserve these opportunities—and if people aren’t willing to broaden their ideas about leadership—then nothing will change.

Jennifer M. Palmieri is an American political consultant, author, and media personality who served as White House communications director from 2013 to 2015 and subsequently as communications director for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Palmieri is a co-host of the political documentary series «The Circus» on Showtime and has published several bestsellers.