home

Kicking Bill Clinton To The Curb

Unlike Jeralyn, I believe this campaign is all but over and Barack Obama will be the nominee. Believing that, most of my thoughts have been focused on how Democrats make sure they do not kick away an election they should win comfortably. What concerns me most is whether the impulse we read from many Obama supporters and in the Media to purge the Democratic Party of its Clinton Wing is the thinking of the Obama campaign. Last night, Josh Marshall provided a variation on this theme:

I think the most revealing thing . . . is that Bill refers to the youtube viral video of Rev. Pfleger as "the movie." In a sense, of course, this is just a triviality of word choice; he's a little out of touch with the lingo. But for me -- maybe just the personal prism through which I see the drama -- it communicates the larger truth: that Bill is a man out of his time, out of his element, which is something painful to watch and must be a unique agony for him to experience.

I find this a dangerous attitude for two main reasons. First, because Marshall seems prepared to toss out the Democratic strength of being able to point to the Clinton Presidency as an example of Democratic governance. Second, it seems to me to show a real contempt for older people, who, in case people have forgotten, STILL vote in higher numbers that the much vaunted youth vote. It is a dangerous game to play. More.

One of the aspects of the Obama image that should be of most concern to Democrats is that his message of hope and change has become, in some sense, a message of disdain and condescension. This is really manifested to me in the discussion of Obama's so-called "Appalachia" problem and the ridicule heaped on older white women who support Hillary.

It is clear to me now that Barack Obama does not have Bill Clinton's gift (and I daresay Hillary Clinton's gift or John Edwards' gift) for demonstrating empathy and concern for the concerns of all voters, but especially working class white voters, seniors and women. His image has taken on a patina of hauteur and disdain. "Elitist" has stuck for a reason. But instead of recognizing this problem, some want to bury the past. Marshall writes:

Bill Clinton was on so many levels the master of the politics of the 1980s and 1990s, the magic with words and connection with people, intuitively sizing up the tempo and undercurrents of the political moment.

(Emphasis supplied.) Here is the danger for Obama - a belief that "connection with people" is so 1990s, that a politician does not need that anymore. I think hardheaded and clear thinking Obama supporters and Democrats need to see this problem and address it. Barack Obama needs to be MORE like Bill Clinton. He needs to think a little bit more like the 1990s Bill Clinton. Because the Obama coalition as it currently exists can win the Presidency, but it could lose it too. Instead of concentrating on expunging Bill Clinton from the political memory, Obama needs to remember what made Bill Clinton a great politician and try to draw from it.

In my view, not addressing this problem in Obama the politician would be the biggest threat to a Democratic victory in the Presidential election.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

Comments closed

< How to Lobby Superdelegates | Will He or Won't He Declare Victory Tonight? >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    BTD - you speak for me! (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by Josey on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:03:45 AM EST
    >>>the Obama image that should be of most concern to Democrats is that his message of hope and change and has become, in some sense, a message of disdain and condescension

    but it was the only way the "unity" candidate could win the nomination.


    It is interesting that Josh Marshall (5.00 / 3) (#147)
    by TalkRight on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:07:27 AM EST
    can write a post commenting on Bill's choice of words and be critical.. but does he have the courage and comment on Obama's choice of words.. "sweetie" for instance comes to my mind.. what decade is Obama from?


    [ Parent ]
    What makes Josh (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by ding7777 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:21:16 AM EST
    think that only the youtube video exists?  

    No doubt there is a longer (movie) version of  Rev. Pfleger's "sermon".

    [ Parent ]

    Well, it looked like B (or lower) movie ACTING! (5.00 / 1) (#227)
    by jawbone on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:41:56 AM EST
    This is another example of the left blogosphere, the MCM Jr type, aping the MCMers' tendency to take something, anything, often out of context, and use it as a cudgel against the politician (or anyone in public life) they don't favor.

    Did Josh wonder about Obama's mindset and grasp of the present when Obama talked about McCain fulfilling Bush's 4th term this past week???

    Josh is showing way too many High Broderism tendencies lately....

    [ Parent ]

    Without Bill Clinton, there would (5.00 / 8) (#2)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:04:45 AM EST
    be no Obama!@!!

    I think when you say "not (5.00 / 8) (#3)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:07:52 AM EST
    addressing the problem in Obama the politician" you identify the problem right there. He never learned to "respect his elders." Remember how he threw his grandmother off the bus, and she raised him!!!

    You can't blame him for that (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Arjun on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:20:14 AM EST
    She was a "typical white person" remember?

    [ Parent ]
    Respecting elders? (none / 0) (#150)
    by hillspwns on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:08:58 AM EST
    Not to mention cutting in line in front of HRC...

    [ Parent ]
    I'm older than Josh Marshall probably.... (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:31:52 AM EST
    ...but I wouldn't say that makes him a spring chicken. Cluephone Josh, my kids think you're old and probably laugh at some of the quaint expressions you use. But only in private because I did teach them to respect their elders.

    [ Parent ]
    Extremely well put. (5.00 / 8) (#4)
    by madamab on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:08:32 AM EST
    Too bad Obama never listens to your advice.

    He and his wife, and everyone they surround themselves with, have an irrational hatred of all things Clinton, including the "politics of the past," where Bill and Hill had to court the votes of "racist bitter low-information hillbillies" to win the White House.

    This irrational hatred, I believe, is what has caused the former Republican Obama bloggers to embrace Obama with such fervor and passion. You see, they were Republicans when Bill was President, and I don't think they ever got over their insitutional revulsion for the man and woman that won twice despite their best efforts.

    Today I heard Obama bloviating about how wonderful HRC was. Just words. No way is he going to change himself to be more like Bill. For Obama, that would truly be becoming the thing you hate. In a weird way, I think it would be against his "principles."

    IMHO as usual.

    True enough, but... (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by magisterludi on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:54:49 AM EST
    Remember Sister Souljah?

    Lisa Williamson, AKA Sister Souljah, was a protege of Benjamin Chavis, who is a big O supporter. I can easily believe the intra-party Clinton hate is based on revenge (especially from this crew).

    BC's smackdown of her was big news, remember?

    [ Parent ]

    good point (5.00 / 4) (#132)
    by DFLer on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:59:22 AM EST
    You see, they were Republicans when Bill was President, and I don't think they ever got over their insitutional revulsion for the man and woman that won twice despite their best efforts.

    I oftent wondered why comments on say, HuffPo, seemed to repea every republican lie about the so-called scandals of the Clintons

    [ Parent ]

    there seems to be irrational hatred for (5.00 / 4) (#155)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:10:48 AM EST
    a lot more things than the clintons. and btd i am having to politely disagree. i feel no desire to put hatersw in the white house. that to me is extremely dangerous. speaking only for me here!

    [ Parent ]
    Whenever I hear BO say anything nice (5.00 / 5) (#164)
    by Shainzona on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:13:57 AM EST
    about Hillary I want to smash my foot through the tube.

    I don't think he is fit to even speak her name.

    Like Bush, when BO appears on screen, the TV gets turned off.  CLICK!

    (Yup, I guess I'm really really really mad as hell.  And I'm not going to take it anymore!)

    [ Parent ]

    Foolishness. (5.00 / 12) (#5)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:09:37 AM EST
    Bill Clinton is a Democrat through and through that we can be proud of. That we SHOULD be VERY proud of. Instead, the Obama camp and the Obama blogs have tried to make him into an old, out-of-touch buffoon. Yes. Our last Great Democratic President was Republican-lite and scandal-filled--as per the left blogs now anyway.  

    Nevermind that Bill had over 60% approval when he left office, something NO other president can claim. But somehow he's become something to be ashamed of.

    What is wrong with these people?  They even throw our last good President under the bus for good measure.

    Yeah and condescending to say the least. Watch how condescending I will be when they beg me for my vote and I deign myself too good to give it.  

    Speaking of buffoons (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by Demi Moaned on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:15:51 AM EST
    It's the same people that are avidly advocating Richardson as VP. IMO, that would be a train-wreck of a ticket.

    [ Parent ]
    Like BTD the first time I heard (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:25:42 AM EST
    Bill Richardson speaking at a panel I couldn't believe he was running for anything. He's a dolt.

    [ Parent ]
    We've (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:00:00 AM EST
    heard Obama sans tele-prompter, would make sense, dumb and dumber.

    [ Parent ]
    would be a trainwreck? already is! (5.00 / 2) (#158)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:12:01 AM EST
    what the dnc just did is called the death knell of this campaign. good luck with anything difference. arrogrance and hubris does not win elections.

    [ Parent ]
    Most Obama supporters like Bill Clinton (none / 0) (#198)
    by Exeter on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:26:31 AM EST
    and most Americans, overall, like Bill Clinton. This is just the loudest faction of the Obama camp-- the "stuff white people like" faction -- that is simply delusional about general election voter preferences.

    [ Parent ]
    You do realise that the (none / 0) (#208)
    by JoeA on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:32:27 AM EST
    stuff white people like blog/site is satirical?

    [ Parent ]
    This dismissing of older voters ... (5.00 / 5) (#6)
    by Robot Porter on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:09:38 AM EST
    has been fairly consistent.

    And it's not something Bill Clinton did in 1992, when he was about Obama's age.  He was the darling of seniors, and spoke out aggressively on their issues.

    Also a quick google search found that referring to Youtube videos as "movies" is not uncommon.

    It has been (5.00 / 8) (#25)
    by madamab on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:19:37 AM EST
    a consistent theme of Obama's.

    I remember when he essentially said that Hillary was a scary 60's liberal who was stuck in fighting the battles of the past. Her generation was just so 24 hours ago!

    It was just another warning bell in my head that Obama was not who he was trying to appear to be.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama supporters called me "old bittie" (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:44:25 AM EST
    yesterday on Jake Tapper's blog.  "Old bittie" was response to my posting re: the Bork Hearings.

    [ Parent ]
    I hope you corrected their spelling!! (5.00 / 3) (#125)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:57:40 AM EST
    "Old bittie" is spelled "old biddy". If they are going to call people names, one would think they could at least spell the names correctly. Heh.

    [ Parent ]
    hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:01:06 AM EST
    intelligence and stereotyping were never mutually exclusive

    [ Parent ]
    Bill Clinton never disrespected any group (5.00 / 5) (#131)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:58:59 AM EST
    Whereas the Obama campaign seems to have disrespect for more groups than not, and now, realizing it needs the votes of the very groups it has disdained, thinks that complimenting his opponent after using dirty tricks to squeeze her out is going to get her supporters to vote for him. Well, the campaign will have to do better than that, and the Democratic Party will have to re-examine its non-democratic conduct.  I'm sorry, but the gratuitous bashing of Bill Clinton by Purdum to help Obama win over the SDs is a new low in trash-talking journalism. I supported Clark in '04, did not think Kerry was the best candidate but as he won the primaries fair & square, did not smear his opponents, and what he would do as president was clear from both his statements and his long record, I willingly joined the unity campaign behind him. I am open to being persuaded, but it's a much harder sell this time.  

    [ Parent ]
    you are more forgiving that the democratic (5.00 / 4) (#167)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:15:31 AM EST
    core is going to be i think. why forgive? do we honestly believe that all of a sudden obama is going to show respect for the voters his campaign distains in the wh. there are so many red flags here. pay attention to them.

    [ Parent ]
    They Have No Clue (5.00 / 6) (#170)
    by Athena on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:16:23 AM EST
    The Creative Class foundation unerlying Obama's rise is possessed of very false power.  In part, the Internet bubble contributes to this - a world of ideas and phrases - where you are just a mouse-click from changing the world.  Wrong.

    But the CC core of Obama's movement totally lacks what Clinton had - class consciousness (unless they immediately know you are not one of them).  Clinton had it in his gut.

    They don't realize who America is - most Americans did not graduate from college, and the high school dropout rate is rising.  

    To them, that's data.  It's not life.

    Class issues for them are academic, and a nice topic for a law review article.  Then it's off to a panel discussion on "The Rise of the Cyberstocracy."

    [ Parent ]

    Did Anyone See Craig Crawford? (5.00 / 8) (#141)
    by Athena on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:03:00 AM EST
    In a panel last night on Dan Abrams, discussion of the "unity" ticket.  Roy Whatever from HuffPo, dismissed the idea - too incompatible - "that's like Apple joining with the PC."  

    To which Craig replied:  "There's a lot more PCs."

    [ Parent ]

    Mac vs PC? (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:19:42 AM EST
    Gee, that's a really interesting thought. THis whole thing is lot like Mac vs PC in the way a certain cult-like subset of Mac users consider themselves so much more hip and with it and in the know compared to us old fogey PC users.  Hmmm.  Lotta parallels there, I think.

    [ Parent ]
    Disdain at its Core (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by Athena on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:24:46 AM EST
    Indeed - that's what Roy was suggesting - new and hip - and as a result totally incompatible with the old fogies.  And a disdain for the old.

    That's why Craig's smckdown of where the numbers are hit so hard.

    [ Parent ]

    while being able (5.00 / 3) (#192)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:24:58 AM EST
    to run about half as much software.

    [ Parent ]
    Bill clinton may confuse movie and video (5.00 / 17) (#7)
    by Arjun on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:11:02 AM EST
    But at least he knows the difference between Auschwitz and Buchenwald.  

    If confusing two trivial things like 'movie' and 'video' puts you out of your element, then what exactly does confusing two concentration camps put you out of?

    And I would (5.00 / 3) (#140)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:01:53 AM EST
    hazard to guess Bill knew he was running for FIFTY states instead of 116

    [ Parent ]
    Bush's 4th term (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:21:55 AM EST
    Great Lake in, where was it, Oregon?  Arabic translators in Afghanistan, on and on and on.

    Give me the guy who knows what language they speak in Pakistan over the guy who knows "viral video" from YouTube, thanks.

    [ Parent ]

    Oops. Try that again... (none / 0) (#185)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:23:10 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Bush's 4th term (none / 0) (#184)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:22:32 AM EST
    Great Lake in, where was it, Oregon?  Arabic translators in Afghanistan, on and on and on.

    Give me the guy who knows what language they speak in Afghanistan over the guy who knows "viral video" from YouTube, thanks.

    [ Parent ]

    I think it's more simple than that (5.00 / 11) (#8)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:11:05 AM EST
    The fact that Marshall quibbles over a word choice only shows that he finds what Pfleger said acceptable.

    Nothing at all ever needs to be said more about Marshall.

    All the other things talked about here are important, but if one is interested in winning in November, before one can even address Obama's weakness with certain demographics, one needs to address, OBAMA NEEDS TO ADDRESS, people like Marshall.

    And kick them to the curb.

    Simple as that.

    First step on the road to Unity.

    If one is interested in winning in November.


    Politics of the past...right (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by americanincanada on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:11:11 AM EST
    except in the WSJ today the Obama campaign is talking about wanting Clinton supporters like M Albright and others to join team Obama.

    Now they're good enough? I (5.00 / 6) (#17)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:16:20 AM EST
    go back to Geraldine Ferraro, if Obama were a white senator from IL with the sort of experience he touts (which I don't believe one could call real experience)he wouldn't be where he is. For a candidate of "change" the only change I've seen is more divisiveness and disengenuous, disgusting propaganda!!!


    [ Parent ]
    Excuse me (5.00 / 5) (#24)
    by cmugirl on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:19:31 AM EST
    This is no in anyway ladylike, and my mother would not be proud, but I think Bill should smile sweetly and tell the Obama folks to go f--k themselves and then take a vacation.

    [ Parent ]
    Vacation? (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by marianne on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:25:41 AM EST
    Sounds good. Maybe we Clinton supporters should take a little vacation from political engagement until, say, December?

    [ Parent ]
    my sentiments exactly! (5.00 / 5) (#39)
    by NJDem on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:26:19 AM EST
    the personal attacks on both the Clintons and attempted destruction of WJC's presidential legacy is one of the reasons I could never vote for Obama.  

    [ Parent ]
    I may have been impressed (none / 0) (#27)
    by Fabian on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:20:21 AM EST
    with that once.

    But now, it seems like Team O is playing a two faced game.  Reaching out with one hand, and ignoring the very reasons that Team O is perceived as being willing to discard any demographic that is resistant to Obama's charm.

    First Team O needs to make it clear that the Clintons are friends and allies.  Then they can reach out to their supporters.

    Otherwise, it will be perceived as false.  

    [ Parent ]

    After saying HRC wanted him dead (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by madamab on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:30:31 AM EST
    and accusing her and Bill of racism, I won't believe one word out of Obama's mouth regarding his friendship with the Clintons.

    He needs to show his contrition with actions, not words.

    [ Parent ]

    Oh, really? Just going to throw (1.00 / 3) (#166)
    by independent voter on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:14:59 AM EST
    that out there with no DATA to back it up? You like to get called out, don't you. And don't do your usual avoidance of sneeringly telling me to look it up. If you are going to make those kinds of claims, you need to support them in your comment.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL! (5.00 / 3) (#197)
    by madamab on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:26:10 AM EST
    Yes, I am trying to get called out by posting information that most people on this site are perfectly well aware of without needed to look it up.

    I am not avoiding you, I am laughing at you.

    You just keep reading my mind, independent voter. Maybe tomorrow you'll tell me the Lotto numbers!

    [ Parent ]

    here's a clue for YOU (5.00 / 3) (#215)
    by Josey on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:34:04 AM EST
    Jesse Jackson really did win SC in 1984 and 1988 but didn't become the Dem nominee.
    It really did take a president (Johnson) to implement Dr. King's dream.
    Robert Kennedy really was assassinated in JUNE during the 1968 primary.

    These are historical facts - but in ObamaWorld they're racist statments!

    With Obama's 20-year education in race-baiting and hatemongering, just think how as president he could ruin the reputations of other good people who disagree with him.
    {{{Scary!}}}

    [ Parent ]

    some of them like richardson (none / 0) (#171)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:16:57 AM EST
    and a few others will join. others with some understanding of politics will sit this one out.

    [ Parent ]
    Regional prejudice plays a big role here (5.00 / 9) (#10)
    by Jim J on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:11:34 AM EST
    As a Southerner it's been painfully obvious to me that a lot of the dynamic in this primary is about regional prejudice. Notice Obama's big backers -- Ted, Kerry, Dean -- are all typical New England liberal losers. They retain a lot of jealousy that the only two-term Dem since FDR was a Southerner.

    While certainly Hillary is a New York senator, she cut her teeth in Chicago and then Arkansas. They lump her in with her husband as a hayseed that they're too good for. They'd rather lose without them than win with them.

    Yup. They've always thought the Clintons (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by masslib on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:16:55 AM EST
    weren't their kind.  

    [ Parent ]
    Yup. The Clintons were trash from (5.00 / 10) (#36)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:24:43 AM EST
    Arkansas and the Midwest. Bill's mother Virginia (I ADORED her) was trashy. She had big hair and a foul mouth.  Neither one of them are blue-bloods. It absolutely KILLS them that Bill and Hillary went to Yale and were more intelligent than them. It kills people like Kerry that someone like Bill Clinton, from his poor background and volatile upbringing is a brilliant man AND that people love him.

    The Clintons never belonged. That's why the Dems helped kill universal healthcare in 1993. It's why they turned on them both on a dime...as soon as there was another elite like them to get behind.  

    Al Gore? I remember thinking "Why would you distance yourself from a popular president, beloved by Dems and moderates alike?"  Apparently I in my 21 yr old wisdom knew more about winning than Donna Brazile back then.  And I still do.

    They will lose with their Northeast Harvard Educated, Worldy Liberal. As long as that White Trash Man's WIFE doesn't win. Shudder

    [ Parent ]

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:51:35 AM EST
    But recall, Massachusetts went big time for Hillary Clinton, despite Kennedy and Kerry.  Our state legislature overwhelmingly backed Clinton also.

    [ Parent ]
    As an MA native, I'm going to (none / 0) (#109)
    by dk on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:51:42 AM EST
    stick up for New England here.  Remember, MA, NH, RI went solidly (in MA and RI, overwhelmingly) for Clinton.  I think if Maine had had a primary instead of a caucus, Clinton would have done solidly there too.  

    I give Dean some credit.  Yes, since he's the leader of the party he has to take responsiblity for the mess that the party made.  But I get the sense from observing all of this from the outside that others in the party bear a lot more of the blame than he does.  And as for Kennedy and Kerry, all I can say is that in this case, they were woefully out of touch when it came to the opinions of their own constituents.

    [ Parent ]

    Then the good (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:04:17 AM EST
    people of Massachusetts need to primary their asses and boot them out of office

    [ Parent ]
    I don't think the two of them (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by samanthasmom on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:12:02 AM EST
    really cared about what their constituencies thought on this one. They have been helping to promote Obama's candidacy from his first speech at the convention.  I don't know if they are anti-Hillary or just pro-Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    My opinion is that (5.00 / 2) (#188)
    by dk on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:24:06 AM EST
    they were thinking like BTD.  I.e., Clinton had too much baggage to overcome, and Obama seemed charasmatic enough to pull it off.

    It would be interesting to know if, in private, they now have the same concerns that BTD has.

    [ Parent ]

    I give Dean no credit. (none / 0) (#148)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:07:34 AM EST
    He has been nothing but a disappointment in every way. First order of business: disenfranchise FL and MI.

    [ Parent ]
    brazile is from louisana i think. (none / 0) (#181)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:21:48 AM EST
    of course she is no guidling light on winning elections. but heck neither is the rest of the democratic party with the exception of the clintons. the books that are written about this will show exactly the lack of campaign smarts and common sense these so called leaders have shown. call it what it is. the people aren't stupid; they get it.

    [ Parent ]
    A lot of truth to that (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:42:20 AM EST
    and now apparently Bill Clinton is some kind of an old out of touch rube who doesn't understand that a video is not a movie.  Unbelievable.


    [ Parent ]
    You really have to stop (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:29:00 AM EST
    including Ted Kennedy in this gang of morons with Daschle and Kerry et.  He's not a "loser," he's not even slightly condescending or sneering about Southern or working-class voters, has worked his whole life for people on the bottom of the barrel, and was genuinely close to and supportive of the Clintons up until The Precious came on the scene.

    His motivations for supporting Obama come from stuff way deep in his psyche about his lost brothers, not "creative class" superiority or Clinton hatred.

    [ Parent ]

    Sounds like you have plenty regional (none / 0) (#218)
    by JoeA on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:35:41 AM EST
    prejudice of your own there.

    [ Parent ]
    As Bob Somerby so famously stated, (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Radiowalla on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:12:40 AM EST
    "Have they kidnapped the real Josh Marshall?"

    People like Josh have gotten (5.00 / 7) (#12)
    by pie on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:14:26 AM EST
    an inflated sense of importance.  If Obama had the qualifications, if he had been sincere in his campaigning, if he had, even once, taken a stand on a controversial issue when he had something to lose, if he had demonstrated maturity and statesmanship, I could understand why people were rallying around him.

    But he hasn't!  It's all hype and marketing.  It really makes me question the judgment and of all these blogger boyz.  They're not supporting him out of some deep sense of party loyalty.

    That's judgment (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by pie on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:15:45 AM EST
    and motives

    [ Parent ]
    hmm, these old(before the great fall) (none / 0) (#194)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:25:36 AM EST
    bloggers are also so yesterday. the new ones on the cutting edge who use common sense like talk left, the confluence, etc will be the wave of the future. whereas after the great fall(november) the old bloggers will be looking for their new little friends, and most of them will be gone on to the next adventure. their old standbys will be long gone to "new, younger" sites that understand reality.

    so those old bloggers need to beware of the names they call.

    [ Parent ]

    2000 redux? (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by Demi Moaned on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:14:33 AM EST
    This has so many resonances of 2000, where the Gore campaign felt it needed to distance itself from the Clinton legacy with the result that a Republican candidate who (by previously prevailing standards) should have been unelectable went on to win the election.

    At least Gore campaign (5.00 / 1) (#224)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:40:22 AM EST
    did not slam Clinton -- just tried to run on Gore's own steam, so did not seem hypocritical. The Obama campaign, on the other hand, spends months trashing the Clintons and now wants them to make nice and hand over their voters.  

    [ Parent ]
    I wish I understood exactly why it is that (5.00 / 5) (#14)
    by tigercourse on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:15:09 AM EST
    the elites of the Democratic party hate everything that has to do with the Clintons. It can't be ideology, because the disdain is present across a spectrum that ranges from Kennedy to Daschle. I don't really believe that it could be a disdain for the working class that the Clintons represent. Kennedy, Kerry, Dean and Pelosi might be rich elites, but I don't think they actually have antipathy for the working person.

    Whatever the reason for this antipathy, it's keeping this party weak.

    A lot of people who aren't successful (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:17:03 AM EST
    Resent people who are.


    [ Parent ]
    Envy. (none / 0) (#86)
    by oldpro on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:44:27 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    They think they're white trash. (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by masslib on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:19:09 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    They were outsiders (5.00 / 10) (#46)
    by Democratic Cat on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:27:51 AM EST
    I think it's not antipathy for the working class, just for the Clintons themselves. They came from freaking Arkansas of all places and succeeded where the party insiders had failed. From a Sally Quinn article in 1998: "At a black tie dinner at the British Embassy not long after the Lewinsky scandal broke, you could sense the distinction Washington makes between one of its own -- Vernon Jordan -- and the president he serves, who is not of this town and who will be gone in less than three years, if not sooner."

    Again, according to Quinn, they committed the sin of not inviting the right people to dinner parties.

    In Broder's words, Bill Clinton "trashed the place and it wasn't his to trash."

    DC is a very provincial town. It's not about good governance, it's about power and position.

    [ Parent ]

    Exactly! (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Josey on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:01:18 AM EST
    >>>DC is a very provincial town. It's not about good governance, it's about power and position.

    I used to think it was just the Republicans who trashed Clinton because they didn't want the Democrats to have an icon like Reagan - as FDR passed into history. But now it appears it's the Elites - Repub AND Dem - who allow the Washington and media Establishment to manipulate public opinion to favor their Establishment candidates.

    [ Parent ]

    power and jealousy come to mind. (none / 0) (#199)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:26:33 AM EST
    throw in hubris and arrogance and you have a losing combination as usual.

    [ Parent ]
    You know, I saw Bill Clinton (5.00 / 6) (#20)
    by masslib on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:18:20 AM EST
    at the Clinton Global Initiative for three days in New York.  He seemed extremely up on the lingo.  These guys ever think his word choice may be to connect with the audience?

    Bill Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#229)
    by standingup on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:42:37 AM EST
    is one of the best at knowing how to connect with his audience, where ever he is speaking.  I doubt the people in South Dakota gave one moments thought to the choice of movie over video.  

    Even when Bill is exhausted from a campaign schedule the last 5-6 months that many of these Obama bloggers could not begin to keep, he could still run circles around them.  And where is the attention to the ridiculously dated words like "sweetie" that we have heard Obama use at least twice?  I could believe an older man falling into the trap of using such a condescending term but Obama is young enough to know better.  

    [ Parent ]

    WKJM = Male Maureen Dowd (none / 0) (#74)
    by Dan the Man on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:40:45 AM EST
    Did Maureen Dowd kidnap Marshall?

    [ Parent ]
    its pod people (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:41:40 AM EST
    no one believes me.  but what else explains it?

    [ Parent ]
    Short Term Memory (5.00 / 8) (#22)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:19:26 AM EST
    Al Gore dismissed Clinton in 2000. It cost him the election. If he hadn't distanced himself from Bill, he would have carried Arkansas and we never would have had to deal with GWB. He is still the most valuable asset the party has. I have never understood the concept of having tearing someone down to build yourself up. That's not leadership.

    No, it's not leadership. (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Fabian on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:26:58 AM EST
    I can forgive politicians for being politicians.

    But the POTUS is supposed to be a leader.  Leadership isn't playing Chainsaw Al with the Democratic Party.  

    [ Parent ]

    Josh Marshall and a few (5.00 / 7) (#23)
    by TomP on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:19:27 AM EST
    others in the so-called "progressive blogosphere" have shown some real arrogance that I think is class and age based.  The creative class is merely the updated verszion of the yuppies.  By self definition, the are not the majority.  

    But what is wonderful is that there is another generation coming who think Josh is hopelessly old fashioned and another one after that who will think the same about the previous generation ....

    Demonization of Bill and Hillary Clinton seems to be an addiction of some in the so-called "progressive blogosphere."  It's wrong, but I expect it to continue even after the nomination.  A few may even see Clinton as a bigger enemy than McCain, which is absurd, but I think for them it is not about politics or issues.  It's something else entirely.  

    I chose Obama about a week before Edwards endorsed him.  I respect Hillary and Bill Clinton and see little difference between the two on the issues.  

    I also agree with what Edwards said about Senator Clinton:

    "She is a woman who, in my judgment, is made of steel, and she's a leader in this country not because of her husband but because of what she has done."

    Hillary Clinton showed a lot of people that she deserved to be where she was because of her own merit, not because of Bill.


    I was thinking the same thing: (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by pie on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:21:36 AM EST
    But what is wonderful is that there is another generation coming who think Josh is hopelessly old fashioned and another one after that who will think the same about the previous generation ....

    [ Parent ]
    Edwards on Clinton (none / 0) (#32)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:22:23 AM EST
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qggO5yY7RAo

    BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    [ Parent ]

    BTD, I also think that it's only a formality (5.00 / 5) (#30)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:21:46 AM EST
    until the presumptive is removed from Obama's race. I have been thinking deeply about my peronal growing concern about the Obama candidacy.

    Admittedly I am angr over Saturday. But that anger goes to the Clinton campaign's actions then also.

    Here are my concerns, BTD: The Obama supporters appear to me to want to dismantle the new-deal foundation of the party. I am attributing this to the followers, not the candidate.

    Women, blue-collar voters, low-income earners, AAs and other ethnicities are all part of the grand coalition.

    I think there's an attempt to reprudiate not only Bill Clinton, but the makeup of the party itself. Obama talks about unity, and about the party, but then his underlings repudiate Clinton supporters and Clinton arguments.

    Policy-wise, there is little difference, but Bill Clinton sold his policies to the public in understandable terms.

    Rather than ramble on, I must ask... does Obama actually LIKE 'the people?' Or does he think his policies are best for the people, and those that dont support him or his policies 'just don't get it.'

    Geez, still too wordy.

    Is Obama the person his supporters say, or is he like his supporters?

    Don't he and his supporters get the love that people have for the Clintons? PAssion! People love to love them, or love to hate them. PAssion is useful!

    This is about respect, even (5.00 / 5) (#44)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:27:30 AM EST
    if you don't mean it. You respect the ones that layed the path for you. Politics is down and dirty in its nature. But I have never known the disdain being spewed now. For me, it's vote candidate, absent that, it's party, absent that, it's country. I am very afraid for my country.Again, Obama sits on the sidelines and preaches his ideas, never having implemented anything to back anything up, just like his iraq non-vote!!!!!

    [ Parent ]
    It may not be popular here, (none / 0) (#48)
    by TomP on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:30:00 AM EST
    but I think Obama is different from a few of his supporters.  I think he believes in that coalition.  Some of what happened in the primary may have been driven by the need to differentiate from Clinton, who was the leader through much of 2007.  Both sides wanted to win and created differences to try to build support.

    Time will tell.

    [ Parent ]

    He does? Then why does he continually spit on it? (5.00 / 6) (#54)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:32:48 AM EST
    Why does he tell us voters that vote for that part of the coalition are bitter, gun-clinging, religious racists? Why does he tell me the leader of that coalition was the same as Bush ? Why does he tell me that part of the coalition is all liars and will do anything to win?  

    Please. Obama believes in Obama.  

    [ Parent ]

    Like I said, time will tell. (none / 0) (#61)
    by TomP on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:34:50 AM EST
    I hope Obama will reach out to bring the party together if he is nominated, just as Clinton would if she is.

    [ Parent ]
    Time HAS told. (5.00 / 8) (#63)
    by rooge04 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:35:32 AM EST
    He doesn't give a rat's arse about the Clinton Coalition.  

    [ Parent ]
    oh, he will. (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:40:59 AM EST
    trust me. he will.  I cant wait.

    [ Parent ]
    He could have (5.00 / 9) (#92)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:45:47 AM EST
    brought it together to get noominated. Instead he divided it by levelling false racial charges against the Clintons. The ship has sailed, with a lot of Clinton supporters on board.

    [ Parent ]
    If so, that is unfortunate. (none / 0) (#111)
    by TomP on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:51:58 AM EST
    After Edwards suspended his campaign in late January, I decided that either Clinton or Obama were far better than McCain, so always planned to support whichever one was nominated.  

    People differ.  That's democracy.  Go with your heart.

    [ Parent ]

    And I looked at my two choices left (5.00 / 2) (#193)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:25:03 AM EST
    I had always thought any of the 3 would do wonderfully. Then when Obama went off script, I saw the real him and it wasn't pretty anymore. I saw Hillary as a leader with strength and I liked her stances on issues. Obama is lite on them. Might be the same issues as her but he is not passionate about them. What annoyed me the most was in SC when the Obama campaign panicked and threw in the race card against Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton? Suddenly his Presidency was bad. Yeah, that peace and prosperity was just a bad thing. Bill was a racist. And then you know what DK was like. Apparently you went with the flow and that is fine. But it was also nasty over there and Obama did not even stick up for them as Hillary did. Obama said he looked at the site again and it was about like he figured it was. Probably based upon the flogging he got there in 05 in his support for Roberts and then defending the votes. Obama is not one of you. Heck, he is not one of me either. He has his own agenda. You don't belong to a church for 20 years that sprews disdain for the white person and sounds like radical militants without something sticking. TomP, I respect your opinion and your trying to get us to ride the Unity Pony, but I truely believe that Obama would not make a good President. I believe he had no leadership and a terrible lack of good judgement. He can easily be manipulated by the good Senators who are backing him. They hate Bill Clinton and thus Hillary too. They do not like that even in his lowest personal days, the public supported him with resounding confidence. Then know that Hillary will not just bend over for them in the WH. And THIS time they know she has the power to push for the right health care program. Bill connected with the people in the 90's. Hillary connected with the people this primary. I will not vote for someone who I believe will not make the Democratic Party proud.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well if I followed my heart (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by Redshoes on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:25:50 AM EST
    I wouldn't vote for Obama -- it's a sad day when the republican nominee issues a brief but heart-felt defense of HRC but her democratic rival fails to defend her and instead was "deeply disappointed" for himself.

    I'm voting my head for the democratic nominee because of those on the margins -- even though I think he's a puppet and lacking even the basic values of empathy and gratitude.

    But as Camus notes:  "The heart has reasons that reason cannot know"

    [ Parent ]

    He has burned (5.00 / 7) (#107)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:51:08 AM EST
    many, many bridges in this candidacy, made humongous irreparable mistakes.  He won't get some of us back -- ever.  Neither will his coalition.

    [ Parent ]
    I'd be more inclined (5.00 / 4) (#180)
    by standingup on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:21:25 AM EST
    to believe you if you could provide one example of Obama reaching out to unite and bridge the gap.  So far he has shown arrogance in assuming that Clinton supporters will fall in line behind him as the nominee.  He will have to do one he!! of a lot of work to reach voters in rural Missouri with his unfortunate statements at the fundraiser in San Francisco.  And his remarks about the people in Kentucky being lost to him because of Fox News and email campaigns are telling too.  I have seen little from Obama to convince me he has any idea of how to lead the party in November.  

    [ Parent ]
    Obama is not different from his (5.00 / 3) (#67)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:37:31 AM EST
    supporters because he knew what was going on and didn't stop it. He, himself, practiced it. To differentiate yourself from another, you talk about yourself. You build up your bio, not trash some else's (unless you have a very weak bio). To say "change" is coming doesn't speak to what change. When you are on all sides of all issues,  it's negative (uncommitted) change. When you tell people you don't want them in your party, it's negative change. I'll stop!!

    [ Parent ]
    The Russians have a saying - (5.00 / 9) (#120)
    by Valhalla on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:56:31 AM EST
    "the fish rots from the head down."

    Either Obama is one of them, or he can't control them.  The choice is poor character or poor leadership.

    [ Parent ]

    B-b-but he transcends having (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by zfran on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:00:13 AM EST
    to simply say what he wants...he only needs to send it to his followers by telepathy and they will understand and obey!!!

    [ Parent ]
    i don't need time to tell me anything. (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by hellothere on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 09:29:13 AM EST
    i trust my judgement and it tells me to run like heck as fast as i can from these folks.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, my (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by kmblue on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:22:13 AM EST
    Just when I think it can't get any worse--
    it does.
    These Obamafolk must really, really want to lose the GE, or else they are guilty of magical thinking.
    I suspect it's the second option.

    FYI: Bill Clinton is NOT old. (5.00 / 8) (#33)
    by Shainzona on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:22:49 AM EST
    If Bill is old, then so am I and I totally reject that characterization.

    I am a 62 years old women who spent 25 successful years in adverting in NYC and then went to law school and practiced immigration law for 8 years before "retiring" so I have time to enjoy the world around me...I swim 4 miles a week, walk and bike 5 days a week and have never felt better...never.

    My mind is sharper, more thoughtful and, if I might say so myself, smarter than any time in my life.

    So kick Bill to the curb and I'll be right there, too.

    AND I HATE TO GET KICKED.

    Exactly (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by ruffian on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:49:02 AM EST
    Bill is not old by any measure. Besides, my 80 yr old father uses the internet every day for gods sake.  Does JMM think it is still the tool of only the young and elite?

    I refer to videos as movies and cds as records constantly.  It is just a manner of speaking.

    [ Parent ]

    Actually, let me go further (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by kmblue on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:23:43 AM EST
    It's time to place the blame at the top.
    Senator Obama, what say you?

    it is a movie (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:26:22 AM EST
    Im really starting to hate these people.

    BTD (5.00 / 11) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:27:00 AM EST
    I give you an A for effort and honesty on this issue but what you are proposing isn't going to happen. Obama has had 6 months to try to expand his coalition and has failed to do so.

    Obama's problems are his ego (he obviously thinks there's nothing that needs to be changed) and cultural. There's really nothing that can be done about these things. There's not a VP candidate alive that will solve his problems.

    In the end, if the party leadership doesn't care about his problems why should we? They seem to be just as out of touch with the electorate as Obama is. Will losing a "sure bet" election wake them up? Who knows?

    "Will losing . . ." (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:29:03 AM EST
    it didnt seem to do much in 2000 or 2004

    [ Parent ]
    How silly (5.00 / 9) (#45)
    by Steve M on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:27:33 AM EST
    Look, it's just dumb to point to the single word "movie" as a cosmic sign that Bill Clinton has lost his connection with voters.  This is Josh Marshall trying to prove he can be vapid enough to write for the MSM, that's all.  It's simply an absurd point.

    Little People who want to be big! (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:33:23 AM EST
    Too many of our progressive thinkers have become too impressed with themselves to bother with trivial matters like facts. Evidently the Clinton people didn't kiss the pinky ring and bow low enough!

    BTD, you can't conjure empathy (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by soccermom on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:33:47 AM EST
    It's a personality thing. Either you have it, or you don't. When he attempts to be empathetic it falls flat.....arugala, anyone.

    and yes (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:34:29 AM EST
    he was a republican.  but that is no excuse.  so was I. once.


    as were Kos and Huffington... (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by NJDem on Tue Jun 03, 2008 at 08:44:47 AM EST
    Truly bizarro wor