It's an opening for Obama, for sure. We'll see if capitalizes on it.
One thing I thought Obama got right in the debate was pointing out the over-use of Bill in Hillary's campaign. Now everytime I turn on the TV I see Bill talking as much as Hillary. At some point this has to start hurting her, as people begin to want Hillary to define herself.
Anyone else agreee?
It's an opening for Obama, for sure. We'll see if capitalizes on it.
I disagree. Did Eleanor Roosevelt hurt Franklin D. Roosevelt? Na I don't think so.
They really are two seperate people and I think most people realize that.
Al Gore ran away from Bill in 2000.
You remember Al Gore, right? The guy who hasn't been president for the past seven years?
At least Bill Clinton is alive and relevant and thus when Hillary brings him in to her campaign it is far less awkward than when any of the Republicans try to convince us they used to be married to Ronald Regan.
This is what passes for a "valid point" in NoWayJose's mind. This also explains how he has come to hold the views he does.Originally Posted by NoWayJose
You forgot the sneer quotes for "views".
Your post bombed, Anaxagoras. A real stinkeroo.
The relationship between a president and vice-president is judged a little differently that the relationship between an ex-president and his wife.
That was when the memory of the sex scandals was still pretty fresh, though. And you could say the same thing about almost all the Republican candidates staying away from a Bush endorsement.Originally Posted by NoWayJose
De-emphasize him? Her campaign's made him their chief attack dog.
The thought of Bill Clinton scolding political reporters for falling for spin is delectably ironic in its sheer shamelessness.Scolding a reporter, Mr. Clinton said the Obama campaign was “feeding” the news media to keep issues of race alive, obscuring positive coverage of the presidential campaign here of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
“They know this is what you want to cover,” Mr. Clinton told a CNN reporter in Charleston, in an apparent reference to the Obama campaign.
“Shame on you,” the former president added.
How could you say the same thing about that? What are Bush's approval ratings, currently? What are Bill's currently, and when he left office?Originally Posted by VictoriaWong
Obviously, a wife is different than a VP, but Al made conscious decision to separate himself from Bill, which in retrospect seems like a questionable strategy. Toward the end when it was looking closer than anyone originally though, suddenly Bill was brought back, but a little too late.
I think he's a benefit, not just because he's still beloved among the party faithful, but because he IS an attack dog, and formidable one. Even Obama seems to be abandoning his ideals of peace and light and is starting to snipe. When it gets nasty, I want the meanest dog in the game on my side.
Maybe it's just me, but in my mind I'm having a hard time defining Hillary beyond her former first lady status. Having Bill be this public makes sense in a number of ways, but at the same time it diverts the public's attention from Hillary to Bill. Are we voting for Hillary to be the next president, or are we voting for Hillary AND Bill? What role will Bill have?
I just think Obama hit on something with his "I'm not sure who I'm running against" (paraphrased) comment. Sure, some people aren't going to care because they are hoping Hillary will be another Bill presidency. However, I think there are a lot of people who realize that type of thinking is not healthy and that we need to look at Hillary on her own terms. For those people, Hillary risks a backlash if she over uses Bill.
Didn't forget them. It didn't need them. Those are actually his views. The sneer quotes actually do go around "valid points", though.Originally Posted by Uncle Larry
Yes. Al Gore clearly lost because he didn't bring in Bill Clinton early enough. OK, dude.Originally Posted by NoWayJose
But the Roosevelts were two different and powerful personalities in their own way. Without Bill's personality, Hillary is an empty shell of bile and ambition, and I'm pretty sure even she knows that. Unfortunately for her, the new Bill is a shadow of his former self.Originally Posted by Supersport
Isn't that laying it on a bit thick? I am sure she is ambitious and all, but I haven't seen anything to suggest that she is more spiteful than most other politicians, and probably a whole lot less so then people like Guiliani. I don't get the demonification of Hillary, I might not have voted for her were I an American, but the hate she evokes* baffles me, especially since her political positions seems pretty close to those of Obama.Originally Posted by noun
* The hate she evokes in some democrats, the hates she evokes in some conservative circles I have become accustomed to.
I don't know if she's spiteful, but she's a very unpleasant person. Watch any interview with her. Her attempts to be charming come across as fake because she's not very good at it. I don't deny her intelligence and dedication, but she's a nasty piece of work.
The devil's in the details; her positions are pretty close to Obama's because Obama is popular. She's an empty politician, motivated solely by ambition as far as anyone can tell, and it shows in her actions, as she basically just does whatever polls tell her to do. You're right that she's hardly unique in this regard, but a) most politicians aren't running for president right now, and b) she doesn't have any real charisma to cover it up, as her husband did.Originally Posted by Johan O
I also get the nakedly-hungry-for-power vibe from Hillary Clinton and find her uncharismatic. Part of me thinks that's innate to her personality, but part of me wonders how much of that is because a female presidential candidate has to hide any empathetic and feminine qualities which would get her labeled too soft (especially in the general election). Hillary Clinton's hair and clothes and body language are scrutinized in ways that male candidates don't have to worry about. It'll take a uniquely qualified female candidate who can run for president and avoid looking either too soft or too shrill and still seem genuine.
Why would Hillary de-empahsize Bill? He's still more popular than she is, and her campaign would be foolish not to abuse that.
How does Bill hurt her? He’s popular. If people think the are electing Hilary and getting Bill again, I doubt that will hurt her. I think now with the economy probably becoming the pre-eminent campaign issue that Bill helps her, since people look back on 1992-2000 with fondness in terms of how the economy operated.
They're married. They're like a single unit.
Bill doesn't hurt her. He's been playing bad cop to her semi-good cop.
THUNKOriginally Posted by Dirt
The problem is its not an equal partnership. It's painfully apparent that Hillary's political career would have amounted to absolutely nothing without Bill's help. Sure, she established a strong legal career of her own, but her political persona is utterly dependent on Bill, which also means people are really being asked to vote for Bill and not Hillary.
Compare them to Obama and his wife, or Edwards and his wife. Will you ever look at them and reach the conclusion that their spouses are calling all the shots?
Is that because Hillary isn't smart enough or able enough to be President? Or is it because, in American Society, a woman still needs the help of a man to get anywhere in life? Especially where the most powerful position in the world is concerned?Originally Posted by noun
It's possible that the marraige of Bill and Hillary Clinton is not representative of "American Society".
Then that, to me, doesn't speak much for "American Society". No matter what anybody says, I think their's is a marriage of equals. Somehow, I doubt Bill would have become President without Hillary. Now, I doubt that Hillary can be President without Bill. They have scratched each other's backs.
Of course not. This problem is unique to the dynamic and history of Bill and Hillary Clinton.Originally Posted by Dirt
Originally Posted by DirtDo you actually read what you type, or is it done with a Ouija board? Hillary either can't exist without Bill or is his equal, but asserting both within the space of two posts is.... special.Originally Posted by Dirt
Bill wouldn't exist without Hillary, either. She had to get him to the top in order for him to pull her up. In "American Society", she couldn't get herself there on her own; she needs a man to get her there. It's sad, really.Originally Posted by Lum