Biden as the Perfect Bridge from Good Past to Better Future
The Obama-Biden debut in Springfield has just concluded and it is easy to see why Biden is the perfect Vice-presidential choice for this pivotal election. Both men spoke with passion, and their different yet convergent biographies nicely underline the theme of realizing and revitalizing the American dream for all citizens in a tough time, even as we recapture respect for the United States in the world. Their tableau in the home of Lincoln embodies powerful reverberations in the telos of American history.
It is easy to see why Biden is the pitch-perfect teammate to go after John McCain, and why those Republican ads showing him praising McCain will backfire. All Biden has to do is to say that he has long known and admired "John," but recently McCain has lost his way -- a powerful character indictment, not just a policy attack, because it clearly comes from a friend. The policy aspect relies on McCain's 180-degree turn toward Bush in recent years. But, as we heard, the Biden critique is even more powerful in bemoaning McCain's profound failure of character and principle in using Swift-boat tactics in this election. This is going to ring true, because Biden speaks for many former McCain admirers in both parties in his eloquent condemnation of that rancid turn by McCain.
Biden can hold McCain personally responsible for this, in a why that in effect questions his honor, without ever saying so in so many words.
Most pundits are commenting on the Biden pick as an Obama attempt make up for his own lack of DC experience, especially in foreign policy. The choice of Biden does help in that way -- and we should not estimate how many leaders in the USA and across the world will be reassured by Biden's presence on the Obama team. Reassurance, in turn, will underline a message about turning U.S. foreign policy away from bluster and empty bellicosity. It will make this more of a restoration of older bipartisan idealistic realism, rather than a retreat to "weakness." Reassurance is an undervalued commodity in politics; it really helps.
But pundits are not yet underlining the most powerful semiotic message conveyed by the picture of Biden and Obama together in Springfield: This is a critical election, in which the change being offered to the electorate comes from a rising leader who is relatively young and part African American. This potential future has to be accepted and embraced by millions of older Democrats and Democratic-leaning-Independents, and by millions of white working-class Americans. They have to support the shift if we as a nation are to realize our best at this moment. Here is where Biden offers a symbolic bridge from past to future. It really helps to have an older, always-faithfully-married white man from a mainstream geographical and class background show by his presence and his enthusiasm that this is the change we need now.
Biden and his picture-perfect white-Catholic family standing hand-in-hand with black-Protestant Barack and Michelle and their picture-perfect children conveys an emotionally powerful visual message about things that unite us all, and about the bridge from the past to the future. So does the evident willingness of such an accomplished and experienced long-time Democratic legislator to work as Vice President under and with a President Barack Obama. In short, Biden is showing as well as saying that America's best future requires embracing this new leader. He will make Obama feel more familiar and safer to whites and over-50-year-olds, at the same time that he passionately argues the intellectual case for the policy shifts this ticket offers. (It matters not one whit if Biden commits a verbal gaffe or two along the way -- especially since McCain commits a gaffe every time he opens his mouth; the contrast of the two elders will be palpable!)
For all that Hillary Clinton is a fighter, too, she could not make this sublimal statement as well as Biden can. A woman and an African American at once could well seem like too much change to many older voters. And because of her ties to Bill and to the seamier aspects of hypocritical politics, not to mention the problematic family mores of Washington DC, she cannot symbolize valuable experience helping to make progressive change as well as Biden can. Truth be told, the Democratic Party's vice presidential nomination going to a principled and enthusiastic older white guy of impeccable character is just what we all need right now!
As a P.S. to my own commentary, I now see via CNN that some Clinton staffers like Paul Begala are whining or "expressing outrage" that she was not directly vetted for VP. This is procedurally ridiculous, because HRC is so well known that it would in effect have been an insult to put her through a formal vetting process and then not pick her. You can bet we would have heard lots of complaints about that, if it had occurred. She could and be no doubt was fully weighed as a possibility without having to force her to be interviewed by Holder and Kennedy, or having to ask her to report on donors to Bill's Foundation. There are many good reasons why any excellent possibility -- and there were many -- was not chosen for this nomination. And there are a lot of more effective ways for Senator Clinton to exercise leadership going forward.
But, really, the bottom line is this: GET OVER IT RIGHT NOW CLINTON PEOPLE, and shut up to the press -- especially those of you who are party professionals like Paul Begala. The country has a lot at stake here and self-immerseration is not appropriate. (Yes, you wish your network were back in charge -- we get it -- but that is now how the cookie crumbled. Had the shoe been on the other foot, we would not be putting up with whining from Obama professionals.)
Millions of us who support the Democratic Party will turn in total disgust away from the Clintons and any of their acolytes if public whining distracts from a successful 2008 Democratic Convention. We all need public unity now, period.
August 23, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps party unity should mean the Obama campaign not issuing a public backslap to Hillary with a 3a.m. text message call to Biden. Perhaps the Obama campaign knowing the announcement would take some time to "get over it" should not have waited until two days before the convention to announce Biden as VP or should have made it abundantly clear that Hillary was not in the running. Seems to me it takes two sides to build unity and just sweeping disappointment under the rug, like you are demanding of Begala, does not mean it doesn't exist. I also notice you left out Wolfson who gave a rousing endorsement of Biden as VP. Selective as usual.
Not to mention the abysmal failure of the text message to his supporters first. The stupidest VP rollout ever. Let's hope this is not the moment we all look back at to say he really blew it here.
August 23, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sorry, I just do not buy the 3am email theory. This was a coincidence, not a slap.
Really, wallowing in self-pity is politically useless for the country, and that is what counts in an election like this. I understand very viscerally the kinds of feelings that older women in HRC's generation have about these things, believe me. But it just is not becoming for any of us to wallow in this stuff in public, or to overinterpret every little thing in self-referential ways. Hillary Clinton is a powerful Senator and will accomplish more in that role than in an awkward Vice Presidential candidacy with Obama.
August 23, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not wallowing in self-pity. It's anger, which as a Hillary supporter who has already chosen to back Obama is not a particularly helpful state to be in 2 days before the convention. I can't imagine how undecided Hillary supporters have been affected.
And I sincerely doubt had the roles been reversed, had Hillary not selected or even seriously considered Obama as VP, that you or others would be expressing OUTRAGE at Obama campaign insiders and African American leaders who took that neglect as a slap in the face.
August 23, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I would not be asking for anything for Obama.
August 23, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt.
But then, I can't imagine the author of this OP to ever do anything but rationalize any and every poor decision made by the Obama campaign.
Obama's campaign does not make mistakes, and if Obama loses it won't be because of their short-sightedness, or their utter lack of respect for the left they supposedly represent, it will be "everyone elses" fault.
Stick to your guns Dijamo, if Theda and other similarly blinded pundits don't get their blinders off, we'll ALL lose.
Again.
August 23, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh dear! You're angry! And so are all the other losers! Oh no! We should undo the primaries because you are angry! I guess if Obama would publicly bow in front of the Clintons it would please you, but you would still be angry so why should anyone bother?
Anger: It is the same as eating rat poison and waiting for the rat to die. Hint: It is a self-defeating exercise, and it doesn't garner respect.
August 23, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only one that appears to be angry here is you, Ms. multiple exclamation points. Is it because some folks at TPM have the "audacity to hope" for a progressive candidate that does more than talk the talk, however eloquently?
I did not support Senator Clinton in the primaries, but it did not escape me how vulgar, shrill, and extreme some of Senator Obama's supporters became, the writer of the OP lost my respect then.
Perhaps you don't want to win this election, but I do, you won't win it by acting like a sophomoric teenybopper at a Beatles concert. Have some respect for others.
August 23, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
What crazy warped vortex did I enter that Cville Dem is lecturing me on anger and etiquette? Seriously?! Hillary has done everything asked of her and more than any other runner-up has ever done for the candidate and the message fro,m Obama and his supporters is not gratitude, but SMILE HARDER HILLARY! SELL IT MORE! Go back and look at her concession speech, look at the Unity speech (which totally blew the Biden event out of the water) and tell me how she could do more.
At some point Obama himself much take ownership for reaching out to Hillary supporters rather than expecting her to turn them over wrapped up with a nice little bow. It is not Hillary's job to woo these supporters, but she IS helping. It is Obama's job and I have yet to see a single outreach from him directly. He's just waiting for people to get over it and realize how bad McCain is. That's a risky strategy but good luck with that. Just don't put the blame on Hillary when she has done every damn thing asked of her if he loses.
August 23, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
O please what self-pity nonsense you write.
Hillary did everything in her power to create your seething. She kept the primaries going long past when there was any chance of her accuring enough delegates to win. Less you have forgotten it is delegates that win the nomination in the Democratic party. Not votes. Yet, you and all of the crazy Hillaryfanatics seem to think somehow that it is votes that counts. How ever did you all come up with that crazy notion? Hillary screeched and screeched about it in primary after losing primary ..the votes, the votes she would would cry..like the fella on The Island use to cry de plane! de plane! boss to Monte. Her supporters have never even once dealt with reality. The reality that Hillary never once even led in the primaries. Not once. Not ever. She lost and she kept losing. Even so she continued to drag the party down creating this mass of whinny sore losers who can't seem to figure out that this country is more important than their personal issues!! The only thing Hillary has done is create the biggest schism in the democratic party ever all because she and her supporters are nothing but sore losers.
Hillary even had the temerity to insist along with Bill that Obama help her retire the massive debt she accured while denigrating the party's nominee!! Billary is behind the scenes right now creating more ruckus by whinning to the press that she was not vetted. As if she was somehow 'entitled' to be vetted like she was the 'inevitable' nominee. Billary is the worse thing that has happened to this party. They had their turn and they need to go home, sit down and shut up. All their supporters need to act like they are DEMOCRATS and NOT Hillarybots.
No one cares if Hillary smiles. What she needs to do is act like an adult and tell her supporters that she lied to them. She needs to tell her supporters that she knew in March that there was no way for her to win. That she deceived them to keep them sending money to her horribly fiscally mismanaged campaign that demonstrated she has no executive skills when it comes to handling massive complex organization. Something most people learned when by the colossal failure of health care that she was put in charge of. She is indecisive. Penn's memos demonstrated that. When it came time to making critical decisions, Hillary deferred to Bill. She was constantly in a state of paralysis and was not capable of leading the ship. Hillary is intelligent and she is a wonk but she complete lacks executive and leadership skills. That is why her and Bill make a good team but she is ineffective without Bill. That has been demonstrated repeatedly. So wake up people. Hillary has earned the respect she deserves.
She does not deserved to be VP, she did not deserve to be consulted, and she does not deserve to ever be put in charge of any project that requires executive managerial skills like governing this country or something as simple as deciding to run that despicable 3AM ad. Bill Clinton is the executive in the marriage. Hillary can't see the forest for the trees. Nor could she discern that it was delegates not votes that determine the nominee.
Obama owes no gratitude to Billary nor their supporters. Their actions are selfish and solely based on their ambitions and not in the best interest of the party. Billary acted like Bubba and alienated the most loyal base of voters in the Democratic party. African Americans. Without their vote no Democrat can become President and over 30% of Congressman and Senators do not get elected. Obama understood the rules for Democratic primaries and Hillary did not. She lost. Now she needs to graciously move off stage and take Bill with her home to Little Rock.
Hillary's 'unity' speech was tepid compared to Biden's passionate and unequivocal support of Obama today. Bill Clinton praised McCain's economic policies just last week! There can only be one President in the White House at a time. So to choose Hillary was out. No losing candidat has the right to assert that their views should be considered or sought. Not after how the Clintons along with their attack dogs like Caraville and the Gov's from TN and OH have gone out of their way to continue backbiting Obama and his campaign. The Clintons have earned being ignored and it is best that obama not seek advice from them whatsoever. The Clintons disgraced the party and they do not have the good sense to understand that they have overstayed their welcome like guests who do not know when to go home.
Hillary supporters are the Democrats who need act responsible and support the nomineee. They are the ones keeping up unnecessry ruckus and acting like spoiled toddlers whinning all the time. Hillary is a pathetic sore loser and so are all the folks who write posts like you.
Grow up or leave the party. I am sick of your bitching and whinning. We have an election to win and folks like you can stay home or vote for McCain but whatEVER you do ...please don't call yourself Democrats until you learn how to put the interest of the country over your own selfish interests.
August 24, 2008 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's a pretty nasty thing to say to a fellow progressive. It is that kind of nastiness that fractures the left and hands the Republicans victories after victories despite the fact that they have nothing whatever to offer the American people.
We get it YOU GUYS DESPISE THE CLINTONS. Fine, try to restrain yourself ok?
You would be seen as a lot wiser if you did not rub salt into the wounds of fellow progressives by calling them "losers" because they supported Hillary in the primaries. Do you really want to further alienate a sizable chunk of progressive voters? For what purpose? What do you gain? It is self destructive to the progressive movement and it has to stop.
You are better than that.
August 24, 2008 3:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
I am not rubbing salt into wounds. The people who loss, refuse to acknowledge the winner and act like adults. Instead they are whinning and kvetching and acting as if the winner owes the loser something. The winner has not ever owed anything to the loser in the history of the party. Never. Hillary is no different.
If the people who claim to be Democrats and Hillary supporters were truly Democrats they would understand that it is time to act like Democrats and not bitch about the losing candidate endlessly.
The nominee owes the losing candidates nothing. Hillary is not the first candidate to lose and not be considered for a spot on the ticket. The first African American to run and win the second highest number of delegates was also not considered to be VP. What makes her candidacy any different?
Hillary is not entitled to anything nor are her supporters, other than to be loyal Democratic supporters of the party nominee.
Individuals who cannot do so, need to move on and stop with the divisiveness.
Hillary lost and she racked up massive debts because she was delusional and refused to throw in the towel. She deluded her supporters into throwing good money after bad, she mislead them into beleiveing that votes not delgates counted in the primaries and she ran a nasty campaign where she smeared the nominee knowing that she could not possibly win.
No one who was a loyal Democrat would even have the temerity to suggest that such behavior earned any consideration for the ticket. And that is as it should be. Hillary hurt the Democrats and her 'supporters' and husband continue to be a drag on the party.
Individuals who do love this party should not have to tolerate all this divisiveness from a losing candidate. It is irrational and detrimental to the party winning the White House.
Anyone not on board with that goal deserves to be told just that.
August 24, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
I am not rubbing salt into wounds. The people who loss[sic], refuse to acknowledge the winner and act like adults
Ho is refusing to acknowledge the winner? And who is refusing to be gracious to the loser? Get your facts straight.
Look I was a strong Hillary supporter and I'm volunteering for the Obama campaign. You are delusional to think that there is some vast Hillary conspiracy to deny Obama the presidency.
What I see is that many primary Obama supporters don't know how to win gracefully instead making a goddamn spectacle of the whole thing.
It has gotten so bad that even McCain is cutting commercials exploiting this shameful behavior by the Obamanoids.
The worse calculation of the Obama campaign in my estimation has been to give credence to the lunacy that taking an anti-Hillary approach after the primary is overwill have some mythical synergy that will help Obama get elected.
On the contrary it is threatening getting McCain elected.
ASIDE: I have a theory that I give some plausibility to that these so called anti-Hillary Obamanoids are really working undercover for the McCain campaign to sow division among our rank. (they can’t be THAT stupid). I urge TPM regulars to be weary of these people. Who are they? What is their agenda? Why do they insist on insulting Hillary and those who supported her? Does that sound like they have progressive interests at heart? I don't think so. It Sounds like they want to divide the Democratic electorate so that McCain--their man--will slip into the presidency amidst a divide Democratic party. Just a theory, but it does fit the facts.
August 24, 2008 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmmm. Interesting. I have thought the opposite, that many of the supposed pro-Hillary die-hards you see here and elsewhere are actually GOP plants. But that's obviously not true of all of them on either side. Paul Begala is no GOP plant, and I see names I recognize from the very earliest days at TPM Cafe among the anti-Hillary crowd; they are not GOP plants, either.
I preferred Sen. Clinton to Sen. Obama in the primaries; in some respects, I still do. But I've become reconciled, no thanks to Obama supporters here and elsewhere, to the fact that Obama is going to be the nominee. And I was feeling very good about his choice of Biden as VP until the "shut up, you damned Hillary-bots" chorus started up again. I try to tune them out, but they are obnoxiously loud. And they are doing Obama no good.
I agree with Theda's thesis that Biden represents a bridge from a good past to a brighter future. I wish she had left it at that.
August 25, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
From AP (believe at your risk)
August 23, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has excellent judgement!
Hillary did not deserve to be considered. She ran the most horrible campaign and at the same time she went out of her way to take Obama down knowing full well in March that she had no possible way of winning the number of delegates to win the nomination.
Mark Penn's memos attest to this. Both Hill and Bill knew it. Yet they dragged out the primaries and attacked and attacked the party nominee for their own selfish ambitions.
There is no way on earth either Clinton should be consult on anything by the Obama team. They are out to sabatoge Obama and he knows it ...thank GOD!
August 24, 2008 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why are you angry. It is just a contest that was lost. Nobody died. Relative to present day politics it was merely another day at the office. It is waht it is. If you don't like the way the game is played maybe you should find something different to do. Complaining about how this one is played will get you nowhere. And Hillary especially knows this because she plays this game really, really well.
August 25, 2008 4:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
What does the 3 am text message have to do with anything? Are we supposed to believe that Hillary found out just like the rest of us did? Grow up!
"The stupidest VP roll-out ever?" It was great according to most of us, but there is no pleasing you.
OK, Hillary is getting a big-night speech. Bill (regardless of his terrible comments where he tried to emasculate Obama) is getting a big-night speech. How about Carter? He is still living, isn't he? What in the hell more could Obama give the Clintons except to cede the election to them?
You have lost all objectivity. On second thought, you never had objectivity.
August 23, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Clintons leaked that mess to the press just so they could once again be in the media and rain on the parade of the VP announcement.
Billary has to constantly be fed and the media happily obliges.
This was Biden's day and yet we are talking about the whinny sniveling backbiting reptilian Clintons.
August 24, 2008 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I do agree with most of what you had to say. My concern is that I just cannot accept that Biden even likes Obama and so it is hard for me to grasp why he was selected to run with him. Makes me think the party has more say than the candidate about who he chooses. Makes me glad I am an independent and hopefully that one of these days we will have another party that will vote the corporate yes people out of Washington and get some good folks to represent "we the people". Will not happen in my lifetime but maybe my grandchildren will be able to really change this awful system.
August 24, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
To which Gene Robinson answered that since Obama wasn't going to select her anyway (noting Solis-Doyle appointment), he'd have been foolish to vet Hillary and then have to explain why he didn't select her (Bill Clinton library contributors)
August 23, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you get that hush-hush info from Drudge or Rove? Nice to see so-called dems still acting with rightwing lies. Excellent way to woo Hillary supporters. They should put you on the outreach committee.
August 23, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eugene Robinson on MSNBC.
Boy shoot the messenger....
Did you REALLY believe she'd be picked after Obama hired Patti Solis Doyle as the COS for the VP nominee???
Take a chill pill from Hill
From AP
August 23, 2008 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really did Eugene Robinson add that parenthetical (Bill Clinton library contributors) assumption or was that your own addendum? And what basis is there to assume Clinton library contributors would prohibit her from being picked? I have respect for Eugene Robinson despite his criticism of Hillary. If you really took that groundless assumption from him, his credibility is totally shot.
August 23, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes he did.
Your world is crumbling.
Too damn bad
August 23, 2008 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh yeah. I forgot Gene Robinson is on Countdown w/ MSNBC now. Makes perfect sense. To assume there is a "problem" with the Clinton library donors that would prevent Hillary from being vetted with no proof whatsoever is slander, not journalism. The library list was going to be her downfall just like the tax returns Obama's campaign was demanding. Ended up just embarassing themselves. This type of smear campaigns is based on innuendo with no facts and it is embarrassing this is what progressives and formerly respected journalists have come to. It's a shame he has plunged so low. And it's even more pathetic that there are fools who fall for it.
One less journalist, one more political hack. Sad.
August 23, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Learn the facts.
Hillary refused to account for the $18M gap in her income tax reports.
Hillary refused to provide the details for her earmarks. You do recall she had the highest dollar earmarks of all Senators, right?
Hill and Bill will not divulge their library donors.
So, they were not vetted for those reasons. Why bother when they communicated those terms from jump.
It would have been a pointless exercise complete with leaks and whines to the press to create ample drama from them.
Obama is no drama...and that means no vetting of the Clintons.
August 24, 2008 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
And now you are calling those of us who support the nominee of our party "so-called democrats."
You have really lost it. Actually, on second thought you never had it. You're behaving like a compulsive gambler; just one more insult and maybe Hillary will get it. Forget it; cut your losses and back the winner.
August 24, 2008 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
personally CVille you are not being helpful at all in this thing. You guys have a bad case of schadenfreude that Hillary lost and you cannot stop yourself from beating a dead horse even if it costs Democrats the election. What a bunch of assholes you are!
August 24, 2008 11:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
And of course it WOULD have come up had Hillary been vetted and not chosen. That and some of the more lurid speculation/rumors/gossip/slander about Bill's post-WH "activities"
The story would have run from the RNC to the MSM and through the convention just to piss moaners like you off
That's why Hillary had the great good sense to follow Gene Robinson's advice
Go hold a bake sale
Retire her debt
August 23, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant idea! In the spirit of unity, I've been contributing to Hillary and Obama in equal amounts since her campaign ended. Do you recommend I stop contributing to Obama and focus on Hillary's campaign debts? Yet another divisive Obama supporter who thinks trashing Hillary and Bill will bring the party together. Good luck with that!
August 23, 2008 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, the overwhelming majority of us to support Obama are fighting party unity, and the other bunch who keep raising the bar of what Hillary ought to "get" are the "true Democrats."
up is down, north is south, dijamo is rational
August 24, 2008 8:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Psst! DIJamo
Didn't you get the memo? No one is trying to woo Hillary supporters...so either get on board or stay home.
Y'all are like Hillary with this sense of entitlement to be woo'd.
Newsflash...Obama didn't consult the Clintons he didn't bother vetting them ...and we are not going to woo you either.
So, now what you got to say?
If you are a true Democrat you know full well that the Democratic party platform has the economic and domestic policies to make this country work for the middle class again.
If that is not enough for you...start steppin..we need folks who know how to be team players, who know how to work for the party and not some crazy Hillaryfanatics who want to whine about why aren't they being wooed.
August 24, 2008 12:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
dijamo
Thir absolute hatred of the Clintons blinds them to the damage they are doing to progressive unity come November.
Frankly I think it is pathological.
August 24, 2008 3:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thans Andrew. I am well aware that there are man, many decent non-Clinton hating Obama supporters interested in unity for the sake of winning in November. Then there are the folks like Vicissitudes who has been seething nothing like hate the whole primary. On a positive note, I a grateful that because of our interaction Vicissitudes has LEARNED to STOP writing her e-MAILS in RANDOM all CAPS for EMphaSIS because NOTHing is worse than ILLOGICAL hateFUL rants except ONES that HURT to LOOK and are INDICative of serious MENTAL deficiENCIES.
Those who appreciate my playing a part in Vicissitudes learning to type in a way that are offensive (even if she has not gotten the message about the content of her posts) can send a donation to www.hillaryclinton.com :)
August 24, 2008 6:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
No one hates the Clintons. The Clintons lost!! There is no reason whatsoever for them and their supporters to no be backing the nominee. The Clintons lost fair and square and all this residual hostility and resentment on the part of Clinton supporters is not good for the party.
Democrats who love the party, who beleive in our policies and platform should be on board with the nomineee. Those who are not on board are not party loyalists. They are troublemakers who feel they are somehow special and entitled to additional 'wooing'. A Democrat supports the party nominee.
Just like the party supported the Clintons when they were under seige despite their trampling on the oval office in such a tawdry manner. Despite WJC and his wife being responsible for the Democrats losing control of Congress after 40 years in power. It was the Clintons who broke the party with the DLC corporatist manuevers and NAFTA which was written by G.Herbert W. Bush, along with welfare reform. The Clintons ripped this party down the middle. They have been a drain on progressive policies and creating 'liberal disdain'. They need to go home.
The Clintons owe it to the party to move on and to get behind the party nominee enthusiastically and passionately. Instead, they are sulking like they are owed something more.
Nuh-UH...it is time to turn the page on all this Clinton drama.
August 24, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
No one hates the Clintons. The Clintons lost!! There is no reason whatsoever for them and their supporters to no be backing the nominee.
Asshole the Clintons back Obama 100% and all but a handful of Clinton supporters will back McCain, which is their right. What planet are you from?
August 24, 2008 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody hates the Clintons, but Vicissitudes then proceeds to blame them for every misfortune the Democrats have suffered in the last 15 years, and accuse them of "ripping the party in two."
I don't remember the Democratic party went out of its way to support the Clintons when the Republican smear machine went after them. And certainly I don't think any of the ones denouncing the Clintons now ever did.
August 25, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who do you think you are, telling people to shut up, Theda?
I really love some of your posts but they're undermined by your arrogance, as exhibited here.
By the way, opposition to the Biden choice isn't rooted in "it should have been Clinton." I kind of wanted it to be Clinton but I knew it would never work and had put it out of my mind. I wanted him to pick a real liberal.
He's an angry old white man who, by the way, voted for the war the same way Clinton did. This pick actually exposes all of Obama's attacks on Clinton as blatant hypocrisy.
But back to the point... Theda... no, you shut up!
August 23, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never allowed my children to say, nor did I ever say to them, "Shut up." Why? because it is an aggressive way to stop a conversation. I would also maybe bring to your attention that Theda didn't say "Shut UP." Why don't you address her actual points? That is what grown-ups are supposed to do.
August 23, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, a smackdown from CVilledem is never a good thing. But... she said it. In her first comment in this thread. She said, "But, really, the bottom line is this: GET OVER IT RIGHT NOW CLINTON PEOPLE, and shut up to the press..."
Theda is telling us what's appropriate to say and what isn't. As much as I like her, that annoys me.
And as much as I like you and will always respond to a slap on the nose from you, you're wrong this time. Theda is being arrogant and she should know it.
August 23, 2008 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shut up
August 23, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck off, kid.
August 23, 2008 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I’m not sure if OBLITERATING a Middle Eastern country would be the most secure and sensible answer to fighting terrorism.
When first ask about a “Dream Team” scenario back at the Kodak Theatre, Obama’s tone of voice was very telling: in a rather quippish manner, Obama said that Hillary could be on anybody’s short list. When asked again later in the primaries, Obama repeated that same comment but toned down the flippant remark. Then, again, when it was asked after winning the Democratic Nomination, he repeated the same answer but was profuse in giving Hillary as many accolades and attributions along side the genteel “brush off”. And with the most recent story from the NYT political blogging site, it was reported Obama never vetted Hillary and as far as the die-hard Hillary base goes, the 3 a.m. notification was the FINAL INSULT. If you never liked nor cared about Obama, there would always be a justification (or excuse) to support your dislike, including the closet feelings over race. It may take the next generation of Americans to arrive at a place in American history where gender and race are played out more as personal “assets” rather than “liabilities” - that we would be divided over economic policies rather than over identity politics…
According the National Enquirer, the new mainstream media source of truth, justice and accuracy, Hillary was alleged to say that Michelle Obama would make a lousy First Lady because Michelle is too confrontational and cold…..hmmm, was that not what many of the pundits were accusing Hillary when she served as First Lady for eight years. Hillary has since mellowed out; now if only her husband, Bill Clinton would chill out, just in time for his redemption speech this coming Wednesday.
Since winning the Democratic Nomination, Obama has been bending over backwards and has done more flips (& flops) of kinds that would even make Mitt Romney and the U.S. Gymnastic team green with envy - accommodating to the Clintons, their supporters, and to the more moderates of the Party. However, party unity might prevail after all when Obama delivers his acceptance speech Thursday night.
August 23, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
to the tune of Chicago is My Kind of Town:
JOE BIDEN IS MY KIND OF GUY
JOE BIDEN IS MY KIND OF GUY
HE'LL HELP BARACK MAKE MCCAIN CRY
HE KNOWS THE VALUE OF ISRAEL TO US
ANY OF YOU WHO DON'T LIKE IT-- YOU CAN SUCK PUS.
Jewish Daily Forward, March, 2007:
Delaware Senator Joseph Biden rejected the notion that the U.S. needs to become a more neutral player in the Middle East, while criticizing the White House as uninvolved and ineffective. He spoke to the Forward for 45 minutes over oatmeal at Manhattan’s Regency Hotel yesterday morning,
“In my 34 year career, I have never wavered from the notion that the only time progress has ever been made in the Middle East is when the Arab nations have known that there is no daylight between us and Israel,” said Biden, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations committee. “So the idea of being an ‘honest broker’ is not, I think, like some of my Democratic colleagues call for, is not the answer. It is being the smart broker, it is being the smart partner.”
Biden, a dark-horse Democratic presidential contender known for straight talk (and the occassional gaffe), has long been a strong supporter of Israel in Congress and is now aggressively courting Jewish voters and donors for his 2008 bid. The debate over the U.S.-Israel relationship, meanwhile, has reached a fevered pitch in the wake of last week’s Washington conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee: On Sunday, New York Times columnist Nick Krisof published an op-ed in the paper that argued that the country lacks a serious debate over Israel, and needs to back away from its “crushing embrace” of Israeli hardliners.
Biden argued that the U.S. doesn’t need more distance, but does need to become a more effective, proactive partner for peace.
“We contract our foreign policy, and that is a dangerous situation,” Biden said. “Do you think there’s any reasonable prospect that the Saudis are going to push Hamas to recognize Israel? So now we have a quote unity government and we’re going, ‘Oh my goodness, we have a problem.’”
August 23, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would you please stop spamming the message boards with that thing?
August 25, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Truth be told, the Democratic Party's vice presidential nomination going to a principled and enthusiastic older white guy of impeccable character is just what we all need right now!"
August 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This refreshed it self before I finished. Not too sure I agree with all that is stated but I do agree a long proven character as Biden is necessary.
And, yes he did admire Strom Thurman; it was based on institutional issues and interpersonal basis. have no problem with that kinda like Thurman myself, at least you understood where he stood.
August 23, 2008 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect that he also admired Thurmond's passionate segregationist stance, given some of his own gaffes.
August 26, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's face reality. Obama can't win without the largest, most important voting bolck of all...white men.
Biden should help...
August 23, 2008 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama played Demo activists like a fiddle
August 23, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lead on maestro!
August 23, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
"symbolize valuable experience helping to make progressive change as well as Biden can. Truth be told"
conservatism to progressive ends is the dynamic that seems to work in American social change.
August 23, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Theda, if Hillary had beaten Obama and not seriously considered him for VP, you would be screaming "racism" and you know it.
why do Obama and his acolytes seem to delight in dissing Hillary and her supporters? it's stupid, it's short-sighted, and it's declasse.
similarly, "shut up and get over it" is really not a helpful comment. I was a Hillary supporter...I'm very happy that Biden's VP and I plan to vote and work for the ticket...but I'd like to see Hillary given some respect anyway. if that's not good enough for you, well, I guess I suggest that YOU might want to do some shutting up too.
August 23, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry Gretz,
This already happened. Jesse Jackson received the 2nd highest number of delegates and Dukakis did not consider him for the VP slot.
Jesse was given a keynote speaking spot...just like HRC has been.
So, if you wanna call that racism...it has already been done.
Hillary is not entitled to be treated any differently from all other losing nominees.
August 24, 2008 12:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
why do Obama and his acolytes seem to delight in dissing Hillary and her supporters? it's stupid, it's short-sighted, and it's declasse.
Exactly. Not to mention that it is suicidal and irrational....
August 25, 2008 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
It would have been "polite" to have at least vetted Hillary. She has served this party well and has broken more glass ceilings than Obama can dream of. Biden was a mistake and will split the party!
August 23, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has NOT served the Democratic party well. she is responsible for the longest Democratic primaries in history. All because she was delusional and didn't know when to quit.
She and her husband disgraced the party and then continued to remain on the national stage long after they wore out their welcome.
She lost. She nor Bill were willing to be vetted and Obama called their bluff. He did not engage their psychodrama and now they are whinning about that.
She lost. Losers are not entitled to anything in the Democratic primary process. nada, zilch, zip zero...
Obama was gracious, he acknowledged her historic role, which is a stretch given that she will be the 4th women to have her name entered into the nomination AND he provided her a keynote speaking spot.
Her nor Bill warranted anymore respect than that.
After the nasty despicable campaign they ran.
August 24, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
To Gretz, believe it or not, I would have moved on long ago (as I did when my first choice fell out in the primaries. Obama would have disappeared after February's primaries if the tables had been reversed, and people would have expected HRC to name a VP like Wesley Clarke. Certainly I would have expected that.
A woman AND a black together is too much for the Dem Party to try this time if it wants to win.
Finally, I am sure HRC WAS carefully considered in the confidential process. She did not need to be formally vetted because there is a full set of info about her with every other campaign, and it would have been really awkward to probe Bill's finances. She could not be publicly vetted and then turned down -- THAT would truly have been an insult.
August 23, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Way too sensible for the angry crowd!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks anyway!
August 23, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
So why does this mean that Obama was right in nominating a conservative Democrat?
August 23, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
but my point was I HAD moved on. I think Biden's a fantastic choice. I like him and his policies AND I think he'll garner Obama votes he wouldn't have otherwise gotten.
so why alienate me and other former Clintonistas like me by treating her/us like we don't matter? we DO matter. the millions of people who voted for Hillary must vote for Obama if he is to win. to believe otherwise is to live in some alternate universe.
pissing off millions of Democratic voters is not very smart. I'm just sayin'...
August 23, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, how about you tell us why you matter anymoreso than the rest of the Democratic party?
What gives with this entitlement crap. You are no more entitled to some special consideration that the rest of the Democrats who are supporting Obama.
In fact, you deserve less because you are acting like sore losers, keeping up divisiveness and whinning for special attention.
Once the party nominee is chosen, Democrat party loyalists support the nominee.
They do not ask for some special dispensation based on their primary candidate losing..that is complete nonsense.
grow up. hillary deceived her supporters..she lost and she milked it for all it was worth and made you all believe she was capable of doing something she had no chance of doing after obama won 11 straight primaries in February...she was toast!
She is the one who failed her supporters by lieing to them and misleading them about their votes!!
Not Obama. Look at how you all can't move on despite the facts demonstrating that Obama won the right to the nomination fair and square.
You all are still talking about votes when only delegates count in the primaries.
Geez. If you want to have sour grapes..take it out on the Clintons as they are the ones who lied, cheated and clawed their way to losing while ripping off their supporters for more money.
August 24, 2008 1:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
gretz
you are the voice of reason in this zoo of Hillary hatred.
I think these people are not so much interested in advancing a progressive agenda but in venting their spleen against the Clintons for basically immaginary slights.
August 25, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
"A woman AND a black together is too much for the Dem Party to try this time if it wants to win." That is the problem with this party! It wasn't about a woman and a black! It was about electing the MOST qualified!
Using Bills finances as an excuse doesn't fly either! There have been no charges or any reason to suspect anything! Now we are stuck with a presidential contender that holds hands with a known, admitted, un-remorseful TERRORIST, Ayers!
3am my ass!
August 23, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The 3Am is not even accurate..unless you were on EST!!!
If you were on CST it was 2AM, MST it was 1Am and if you were PST, it was midNIGHT.
Grow up!!
August 24, 2008 1:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
As Dante Alighieri might say, had he ever written in English:
My friends, if I might have a word or two
About a subject that just slipped my mind ...
No, wait! I'll have my staff get back to you
About how many houses, and what kind,
My wife might own in various disguise
To keep the tax-man guessing, vexed, and blind ...
... I know! I never meant to criticise
The Black Messiah preaching to the choir
Or spread those Foreign!Muslim!Traitor! lies
Of which, my friends, you know you never tire.
So when I spit and drool you never flee,
But sit, engrossed, around your TV fire.
I'm John McBush, I think you'll all agree.
Abandon hope all you who'd vote for me.
August 23, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't like your post and your repeated addenda to it and responses to others. Stop calling us Hillary supporters names and characterizing our comments as whining, etc. It's offensive. Naming Biden is a colossal blunder. To me and many Democrats, admittedly not many Republicans, Biden's abandonment of Democratic principles in favor of the credit card companies and his participation in passing the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 ranks as one of the great legislative crimes against human beings - the citizens of America - in history. Just ask Elizabeth Warren who contributes to TPM if this was a good and fair bill. The answer is NO!
Second unforgivable Biden offense was his siding with Specter and his assault on Anita Hill during Judiciary committee hearings on Clarence Thomas.
My wife, a member of move-on and as srong a liberal Democrat as could be, will not support him because of that.
Accusations of plagiarism and his theft of British politician Neil Kinnock's words as his own during the 1992(?) Presidential race is only a minor crime. In his own words, sometimes he speaks roughly.
In this year's primary race, Biden showed his vote-garnering ability in Iowa by getting no votes or delegates.
You accuse those of us who believe that Hillary is the better candidate of whining. Hillary's fatal mistake, it's now so apparent, was not going to Iowa - she would have won , in fact she certainly did win the Democrat states that count - and today she would be in a position to pick Barack as her VP candidate. In the general election, Biden is not going to help Obama carry even his winning primary states like Wyoming and Montana and may be of minor help in critical states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.
This ticket is just the old boy's club, buddy boy team. Women will drop out in droves. They won't urge their husbands and children to get behind Obama. I can sadly hear the hiss of air escaping from the Democratic balloon.
If McCain picks a woman like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, a very decent Republican Senator, he is likely to win the election. I just can't get over how dumb this Biden move is. The posters on this site like you and MJ Goldberg, and Josh Marshall himself have set the stage for a major disappointment for all Democrats and for the country.
August 23, 2008 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not accusing anyone of whinning. It is a flat out assertion. And if you can't recognize that you are whinners. Tough. that is part of the delusional state Hillary entranced her supporters with.
You LOST. Move on!!
August 24, 2008 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you're going to accuse people of whining, at least learn to spell it correctly.
August 25, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen. Biden sucks....I was never crazy about Hillary for the same reasons I despise Biden, but at least Hillary has bigger balls.
" All Biden has to do is to say that he has long known and admired "John," but recently McCain has lost his way"
Ugh, great, so Biden was *for* McCain before he was *against* him.
He's known McCain for decades, even publicly praising him in 2006, the Youtubes and audio all there, and he's to be believed to have witnessed an astonishing "change" in McCain in less than a yr that somehow eludes him for the 30+ years before. Either that or he's doling out the usual political bs. I wonder which version the voters will find more convincing.
August 25, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
The bitter remnant of the Clinton campaign continues whine when they could spend their time productively.
They could be out raising money to retire her debt
I was so impressed with her concession speech I donated to her campaign
Ever since then, I've been receiving emails from Hillary, from Bill, from Terry McAuliffe asking for more.
So why don't you all do me a favor? Shut up and go retire her debt so she won't continue to clog my inbox
Received today:
DNC Convention
Dear John,
I want to congratulate Joe Biden on becoming the vice presidential running nominee. Joe is a friend and colleague, a strong experienced leader and a devoted public servant. I look forward to not only seeing him in Denver next week but on the trail as I work to help Barack Obama and Joe Biden along with many other Democratic candidates campaign this fall.
Go hold a bake sale. We've some very dangerous Republicans and the most important election of your lives to win
August 23, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
From the Committee for Outreach to Gretz
sheesh
August 23, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you think of the number at http://www.bop-o-rama.com? It is going to be a tough campaign. Do you think Hillary and Bill will really get behind Obama? I am not so sure they will do anything more than give lip service.
August 24, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dijamo wrote: "Perhaps party unity should mean the Obama campaign not issuing a public backslap to Hillary with a 3a.m. text message call to Biden."
A bit of information on this perceived slight might help calm tempers. I just learned from a broadcast on CNN that wireless service providers send out bulk text messages at 3 am when there is less traffic on the network. The idea that the 3 am text message was a slap in Hillary's face is a rumor started by the McCain campaign--apparently successfully since it's been repeated now countless times by Hillary supporters.
Be careful about what you perceive as a slight. The Republicans have a vested interest in sowing discord among Democrats this year. They did it a few weeks ago when they claimed Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were having tense exchanges about the format for the convention. It ended up that Obama agreed to the roll call vote readily. Sounds quite gracious to me.
August 23, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
to John McCSF:
hold a bake sale? HOLD A BAKE SALE? boy, you really know what to say to a gal, don't you?
August 23, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
My email stamp was timed at 5:01 AM... should I be angry about something? Please let me know. I just don't know what to be angry at these days anymore!
August 24, 2008 12:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tobie, wouldn't it have been more polite to have sent it at 3:15 or 3:18? Doesn't "Dead On" 3 am show a certain level of "In Your Face?" Maybe we do "perceive" it as a slight but if it had happened to you, how would you have "perceived" it? I have to tell you when you "perceive" that you are being treated like a "White Trash Bitch" you can't help but feel resentful. PUMA08!!!!!!!
August 24, 2008 12:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are personalizing this WAAAAY too much. And the answer is NO to your questions.
There is no in your face, other than what Hillary did to her supporters. She was in your face raising money long after she had a chance to win that was DEAD WRONG...not on!
Focus and redirect your rage on Hillary ...this is all her fault. She was the one with the 16 years of political experience and the unstoppable political machine and unparalled fundraising prowess...and yet she could not manage a campaign effectively to win.
The deck was stacked for her, she had most of the superdelegates that Bill appointed in her pocket but she couldn't EARN enough delegates in the primaries and caucuses to win.
she was the one who said the race would be over in Feb when interviewed in Dec 2007...and she was right.
She lost way back in Feb but she continued to leach off her supporters and have them send her money to pour down the drain
Why aren't you angry about the horrific fiscal mismanagement of her campaign? why aren't you mad at how she snoookered all of you into wasting time and effort after she lost?
August 24, 2008 1:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also, I just saw someone say in a video that they got their text message at 2:37AM... hmmm...
August 24, 2008 12:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
You need to find out if that was CST..if so that sounds right.
August 24, 2008 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't know where she was from, but she was in Springfield, at the Obama/Biden rally when she said it. I'm in NYC, EST. Still, not 3AM.
August 24, 2008 1:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Illinois is CST
August 24, 2008 2:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this man described many times today as having "impeccable character" and "integrity" will go down in history as the man who gave the USA, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
August 24, 2008 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, I know it's CST. But if it was sent at 3AM, then my timestamp would have been 4AM...
Biden was also the drafter of the Violence Against Women Act.
August 24, 2008 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Biden is a safe pick but will he help restore unity to the party? Hillary is going to have to really step up to the plate and try to deliver her millions of supporters. Obama on the other hand, needs to come out of the clouds. I think Biden will help on this. This all said, I have been following both the Daily Gallup, http://www.gallup.com/poll/109783/Biden-Does-Harm-May-Help-Much.aspx and the real-time, open poll, Bop-O-Rama, at http://www.bop-o-rama.com. Is there a "Biden Bounce?"
August 24, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Tobie, wouldn't it have been more polite to have sent it at 3:15 or 3:18? Doesn't "Dead On" 3 am show a certain level of "In Your Face?"
C'mon, OldSarg, give it a rest. As several people have written in here, they didn't receive the message at 3am on the button. It seems like most people got the message thereabouts.
It sounds to me like you want to perceive a slight and will therefore interpret every fact or putative fact within a Hillary-centered framework. The Republicans are doing everything in their power to encourage such interpretations. See for instance Bill Kristol's blog today.
Another Republican-inspired rumor is that Obama hasn't bothered to reach out to Hillary supporters through HRC's email list. The reason for this is simple. HRC has not released her email list. Why? Because she still needs to retire her campaign debt. That's one of the reasons she's been going around the country. She's not doing this solely, or primarily, for love of the Democractic Party.
I don't fault her for this one iota. That's how politics work. But I'm disturbed that for so many HRC bloggers she's gone from being politician Hillary to Saint Hillary.
August 24, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think she's gone from Hillary to "St. Hillary" because a lot of us see her as having been martyred.
I was lukewarm on HRC until Iowa. but the meanness of the TV talking heads (gold medal goes to Chris Matthews) and the coronation/beatification of Obama really turned me off. they were calling for her to drop out then, for godsake!
the party had already picked Obama at that point. and suddenly, anyone who didn't support him was a racist, and a pernicious racist at that because we weren't even AWARE we were racists.
the reason the PUMAs are so quick to see offense is that offense has been meant at so many other points in this campaign.
think how different it would have been had the Obama camp called Hillary to say "We're going to pick Biden, we think. what's your opinion?" there would not be all this squabbling.
for those of you who think Hillary doesn't deserve any respect, I would ask you to think about past elections and the respect (and sometimes the vice presidency slot) that routinely went to the runner-up candidate.
August 24, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gretz,
I do beleive you are quite inaccurate in your perspective of the runner up ever getting some undeserved respect from the nomineee. Not in the history of the party has the losing candidate been accorded such a place as 'being consulted'.
It is just plain commonsense, why would anyone consult with a loser? A loser who after 16 years on the national scene and being the inevitable nominee ran up massive debt despite having unparalled fundraising power heretofore? Why would anyone consult an individual with that type of track record? Particularly, someone who it has been revealed in memos, knew they had lost in March but continued to drag the primaries out instead of graciously concedeing the race to the nominee?
Why ever would someone that delusional be consulted?
People aren't given respect they earn it. The Clintons earned the manner in which they were treated for all their hateful negative racemongering campaigning. Hillary even had the gall to categorize voters as the whiteworkingclass as if other races are not the working class as well.
Puhleeze the Clintons are the ones who polarized the primaries on the basis of race and gender.
If Hillary had run as an individual on her own accomplishments, rather than Bill's record, and her own political achievements rather than as the first woman..she might have won. Instead she beleived she was inevitable as Bill's wife and that she could rally people to vote for her on the basis of gender. It didn't work. She lost.
She lost because there are far more accomplished political females and people were unable to find any record of leadership or achievement on her own merit. She was an empty suit. That is why she lost. Even all of Bill's racemongering couldn't save her. It only alienated the most loyal base of voters in the Democratic party.
For all those people whining about her lost, they seem to forget that the African American vote is responsible for previous Presidential nomineees being elected as no white Democratic national candidate has won the White House without the black vote.
Neither Carter, Kerry, Clinton or Gore won a majority of the white vote.
So, race has loong been a factor in national elections and Bubba Bill understood that and tried to use it to Hill's advantage in the primaries but it backfired and they lost. It was blatant and it was divisive.
Can you cite any individual who call them a racist? The only thing I read about the Clintons is that they were racemongering.
August 24, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um... Clinton is a loser? Then what does that make Biden? He got slaughtered in the primaries.
August 24, 2008 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Clinton lost!
She is not owed anything!
The rest is basically crap!
Like it or not Obama won!
August 24, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the honesty, Gretz. As much as you felt that everytime you criticized Obama you were accused of being a racist, so too many Obama supporters felt that they could not say anything critical of HRC without being accused of being a sexist. The paranoia did cut both ways.
My point is that I don't see how continuing the paranoia serves anyone's interests. This election is not about Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John McCain. It's about healthcare, a sane foreign policy, jumpstarting the economy, weaning the country of oil dependence, etc.
I refuse to engage in "what if's" which as Theda has pointed out can also cut both ways. We need to give this thing a rest and direct our energies elsewhere. Why not start a sexism in the media watch akin to Media Matters? Who knows, that could have a lasting impact.
August 24, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
tobie,
I have to disagree with you: I think this election is ALL about Obama. if you read any of the conservative blogs (I try to read a bit from every perspective, if only to find out what "the enemy" is up to) you'll know that nobody's talking about McCain, not even the GOP.
I wish people were talking about issues, but I don't think they are. as a great example, look at how much we're all (well, most of us) happy about Biden. I think we're happy because we understand that he's going to help the party win in November. but on issues, on actual votes in the Senate, he's very different from the guy at the top of our ticket.
my 17-year-old daughter told me last year that she thought it was "selfish" for both Obama and Clinton to run this year, since "it's too important, and it's not the time to see if the country is ready for a black or a woman." I think the race HAS become about personality, race/gender, whatever, and that's too bad.
like most nominal "liberals" I'm happy a black man is running for president. but I believe that the true liberating moment will come when a black man can LOSE an election and it's not because he was black, but because he was the lesser candidate.
August 24, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope the primary will finally end at the roll call vote for Hillary Clinton at the convention. I was a Dennis Kucinich supporter and have real policy disagreements with Clinton and Obama. But I really want a Democrat in the White House and John McCain scares me.
This stuff from Hillary Clinton's surrogates (especially Bill) and supporters is starting to look destructive. We haven't won anything yet. We can fight after we win.
August 24, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
HEH HEH HEH HEH,
keep up the good work Democrats, keep going after one another's throats, keep that anger churning.
John McCain
August 24, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on democrats! We have to get McCain's number up! http://www.bop-o-rama.com. I mean come on. It is our convention week. Spread the word about this real-time poll!
August 24, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Theda: I saw that Begala interview and while he may have made the complaint about the vetting, it sure seemed he was also making some good noises about Obama. I've been trying to get positive Obama/Biden articles more attention by posting them on Reddit. I posted a link to this one before I read the comments, and now I'm wondering if I made a mistake. We really need to stop fighting and I'm praying that the convention will accomplish that.
If not, say hello to President McCain.
August 24, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
PUMA Bakesale For John McSame
Howard Fineman with a report for the 20 member PumaNation ... GOP Dirty Trick #3,194
August 24, 2008 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed, but then You-Know-Her really, really, really, wanted to say "no" --- and in the most public, humiliating (for Obama) way she possibly could. He simply and wisely didn't give her that undeserved opportunity.
I wouldn't have thought it of the happily monogamous, sqeaky-clean Sunday-School guy, but he does appear to have visited a bar or two and observed the real reason loser chicks frequent those places: namely, to enjoy the only chance they'll ever have to stare dismissively at a hard-up loser guy who just offerecd to by them a drink, and mumble -- after an agonizingly delicious three minutes of looking the poor slob up and down with a sneer -- "Oh ... uh ... er ... ah ... no."
Good for Barack Obama with his one house and one spouse. I think the young man has repeatedly demonstrated a perceptive intellect and wise judgment far beyond his years. Of course, Joe Biden sucks wind, big time, for his banker-buddy bankruptcy bill, merciless mania for draconian drug laws, and stupid militarist vote to authorize Deputy Dubya's stud-hamster vendetta against the toothless Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But then, that goes for You-Know-Her/him/them, as well -- and a whole lot more besides -- so I'll go along for now in the expectation that Biden the brawler will kick old "noun, verb, POW" McBush's sagging butt all over the political parking lot. President Obama can later either convert Biden to real working-class humanity or dump him in favor of a more progressive running mate four years from now.
The foreign-born Panama-John McBush doesn't have much of a character to defame, but what little he has ought not to remain unbesmirched several weeks before the first Tuesday in November. As Paul Krugman -- no Obama fan, to say the least -- says in the New York Times today, Obama and Biden only need to tarnish McBush enough to make it clear that he belongs to the Bush/Cheney republican party. Any Democratic ticket, Krugman noted, should easily beat that discredited brand. At this stage of the summer doldrums, apparently, a good many people still don't associate McSame with Bush and the republican party. That must change right now.
So, forget Grandpa Simpson McBush. "D" for Democrat whips "r" for repugnant-one, any day. Let us now see Joe Biden finally earn his party stripes. One the Democrats assume office next year, we can then go to work repealing that awful bankruptcy bill, ending those draconian drug laws, and ... oh yes ... end Vietnam II (Iraq) and Vietnam III (Afghansitan) as well. Lots of good and necessary things to do, but it takes getting elected to get them done.
August 25, 2008 5:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bankruptcy, drugs, wars, ...um you do realize you're talking about bills that Biden fought for and voted in?
August 25, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but please try reading a little more closely and you'll see that I noted those very liablities of Biden's. I do not favor him and as I've also said many times. I would have preferred Al Gore or my fellow Vietnam Veteran, Senator Jack Reed (Rhode Island) as Barack Obama's running mate.
I won't write any more sentences, however, as I wouldn't want to tax your ability to follow a clearly stated point of view.
August 25, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever the strengths or weaknesses of Hillary as a VP candidate, I just don't see how Obama could have picked her with that loose cannon Bill in the background. Hillary may be great, but her husband likes the spotlight way too much, and Obama can't take the risk of Bill interfering with the campaign or--more importantly--with the governance of the nation should Obama actually be elected. Having an ex-President with Bill Clinton's personality in the White House would have been a huge headache for Obama. He's very smart not to take the risk.
Obama has to believe he can work with the VP candidate, both during the campaign and afterwards. Maybe he could work with Hillary. But having to work with Hillary and Bill would be too much, and more than anything, I think that doomed Hillary from being considered.
One also has to take into account Hillary's slowness to drop out when a win was nearly impossible, her delay in conceding (yes her speech was nice, but it should have been given the night Obama won, not several days later), her relative silence since the primary at a time when more vocal and visible support for Obama would have been helpful, the various comments of some of her campaign staff, and the demands her people have apparently made for a very prominent role at the convention. A VP has to be willing to play second fiddle--and not look like he or she is upstaging the Presidential candidate. Hillary's actions raise questions about whether she's willing to play a secondary role or if, instead, she's really demanding to be a co-President. With ex-President Bill also in the background, Obama couldn't take the risk of being upstaged by his VP candidate and her husband. He was smart not to go with Hillary, even if it risks losing a few of Hillary's supporters.
August 25, 2008 7:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suggest Biden graciously drops out with a "more time with my family" stunt as the polls tank and we start over with a credible VP, Kucinich, Sebelius, Clark. If Obama needs a really, really old guy, a Washington Monument, he can pick Gore.
I'll send money right away.
August 25, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we ready for a group hug already,....or should we wait till next week?
August 25, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, for the record, where I come from the Winner is obligated to graciously reach out to the loser. Otherwise... well, bad blood keeps on going.
As for Biden... well, you know, me and my friends were just saying that Elderly, Millionaire, White, males of the Political elite were underrepresented in this election. I'm sure that Biden will help to split that vote from McCain.
August 26, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink