An inconvenient vote: Hillary Clinton's Iraq war image repair debate strategies and their implications for representative democracy

• Hillary Clinton used the 2007–2008 presidential primary debates to defend her votes to authorize and fund the war in Iraq.
• Hillary Clinton employed image repair strategies of differentiation, defeasibility and mortification.
• Hillary Clinton's contradictory and inconsistent combination of defeasibility and mortification was ineffective.
• Inconsistent and contradictory rhetoric violates democracy's expectations of consistent and responsive leadership.

Hillary Rodham Clinton was one of four 2007–2008 Democratic presidential candidates who had voted to authorize U.S. military use in Iraq. Given her status as the front-runner, Clinton's vote, in particular, presented a public relations problem for her among primary voters who strongly opposed the war and favored its prompt end. This study analyzes Clinton's attempts in debate performances to repair her image among voters. Clinton attempted to reduce offensiveness through differentiation, attempted to evade responsibility through defeasibility, and employed qualified mortification. Clinton's strategies were rated as inconsistent and their effectiveness is questionable.