Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Bill Clinton Endorses Obama?
"If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other one is try get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope." Bill Clinton
Now, if I were Obama I'd be running this quote in response to Hillary's new "positive" ad that, by the way was ripped off from Mondale in 1984. (I guess for all her fuss about "plagirism" Hillary really doesn't mind as long as its her campaign doing it, but that's besides the point)
It really does shock me that Hillary Clinton would go this far in trying to win. I mean, I knew she was a fighter and that she wasn't going to just roll over and die, but I have a feeling this ad could resurface in the fall. All John McCain or the RNC would have to do is say, "See, even Hillary Clinton thinks this guy isn't up to the job."
Hillary should run a vigourous campaign. And she should be trying to win. But she should also recognize that there is more at stake in this election than her future and her husbands legacy. And if she recognized that, then maybe she wouldn't be employing a "kitchen sink" strategy to try to destroy Obama. That's something we expect republicans to do. That's not something we expect a member of the democratic party to do.
Perhaps Senator Clinton knows its too late for her to win this time around. And maybe she's cynically trying to undermine Obama so that he won't win in the fall so that she can try again in 2012. If that's the case, shame on her.
But for all my speculation, I don't know Hillary's motivations. I do know this ad doesn't belong in the Democratic party. It's a republican ad using republican tactics of fear and smear.
Comments (10)
A long time ago an Obama supporter here said something like, "If Hillary wasn't running, Bill would be an enthusiastic Obama backer." I agree with that.
Which is why Obama shouldn't be making arguments like that, or like you suggest, right now.
Because if Obama wins the primary he'll probably find no more useful ally than the still very popular Bill Clinton in the general election.
Obama gains nothing by ticking Clinton off right now.
February 29, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's hard to see Bill endorsing him after all the harsh things Bill has had to say about Obama. Which is why I thought he should have stayed out of this campaign even though that was never gonna happen as long as Hillary was running.
Bill Clinton is more than just Hillary's husband. He's the last democratic president and the standard bearer for the party. And it undermines Obama's credibility when Bill Clinton goes on the attack against him.
I thought Bill, due to a conflict of interest, should have stayed neutral. Maybe thats not fair to Hillary, but its certainly better than having the RNC or McCain pull up quotes like the "fairy tail" line that will have especially damaging consequences precisely because it was Bill Clinton saying it.
But it was obvious that Bill wasnt gonna be neutral, so i though ok, use him to advocate FOR Hillary. But thats not what happened. Bill wasnt campaigning for Hillary as much as he was campaigning AGAINST Obama.
Truthfully, if Obama is the nominee, Bill probably will support him. But that support is going to be as disingenuous as the "fairy tail" remark, because Bill throughout this campaign, has provided plenty of ammo to be used against Obama. Ammunition that is especially damaging because it comes from a semi-popular ex-democratic president.
February 29, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see what you're saying. The public really forgives turnabouts from the primaries to the general, though. Heck, people who were at each others throats often wind up on the same ticket.
In the general Bill will still be an asset. If you think he was rough on Obama, just watch what he can do to Old Man McCain.
February 29, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
the public might forgive it, but that doesnt mean the quotes are gonna go away. John McCain will make sure they dont.
Its really very hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube once its out.
March 1, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, which is one of the reason that I think Barack Obama has the advantage here. Clinton has left herself open to a number of easy counter-punches of this nature that Obama has simply passed up.
In the end, this will make it much easier for him to bring Clinton supporters under his flag than it would be vice versa.
What is puzzling to me is how this concept is apparently lost on the Clintons, people who have demonstrated that they are not bereft of political savvy.
February 29, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have to give wolfie points for being practical: if the Clintons don't win, they can recoup some of their expenses by selling the ad to Karl Rove, who said some time ago that "The president's job is to lock the doors at night and keep America safe from terrorism."
February 29, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other one is try get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope." Bill Clinton
The best thing about that quote is that when Clinton said it in 2004, he said it because Bush and Rove were trying to win votes by scaring voters and appealing to their fears. And yet now it applies so aptly to the campaign Hillary is running.
February 29, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm afraid that while on the surface Bill Clinton will endorse and claim to support Obama, behind the scenes he will be working against him with the hope that John McCain would be elected for one term, be 4 years older when facing re-election, and Hillary will have another chance. If Obama gets elected, she won't be able to challenge him. It's all a game to them and winning is all that matters.
While I think that Bill was a good POTUS in general,(and Hillary would certainly be better than McCain) it's Bill's self centeredness that put Al Gore in a position to lose. If Bill had finished his 2nd term without the scandals, Gore would have been a shoe-in.
February 29, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't think Bill was trying to finish his second term with scandals, besides Gore lost because:
1. He distanced himself from Clinton
2. The Bush brothers cheated
February 29, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
HI-JACKED ELECTION:
I have been researching information on Obama and the things I found are very deceptive. The Houston Chronicle reports that Republican voters are going to the polls to vote for Obama to make him the nominee. Then in November, the same Republican voters intend to go to the polls and vote McCain. After reading many articles and blogs, I came upon a blog writeen by a woman from Canada who said her husband went to an Obama rally where he told the voters to "Become a democrat for a day." This falls in line news reports that Obama is the least accessible candidate. Therefore, the news reports are biased in Obama's favor. The woman from Canada had also attended a townhall with Hillary Clinton. She was impressed at her heartfelt campaign. Needless to say, the Canadian couple believe that Obama is very deceptive and think that our best next President would be Hillary Clinton to lead the country in the right direction.
The next thing I did was to google search "Report Deceptive Practices" and in the list were two sites that referred to Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Act of 2005, proposed by none other than Obama. This bill was passed and an Amendment was later passed.
If the voters would check and research the person that they are voting for, I think that they would find that Obama has many shady dealings. Along with that, his record in the senate proves that he does not deliver on his promises. He puts out a false front to the democrats while behind the scenes much of his work seems radical Republicanism. Hence, the speech on crossing partisan lines and promises of unifying the parties. It is all farcical.
If you really want to fear anyone, you should really think about fearing a "Charismatic leader." Most of the intelligent military leaders endorse Hillary Clinton. Why? IT is no mystery. I have done the research. Obama has shady dealings with the far left VIOLENT radical Weather Underground members. That is how he got some of his start in politics. Where did he get the money for a private jet and a house he could not put a down payment on, but mysteriously got the money within 24 hours. Is the connection with Rezko? By the way, Rezko is on trail this week with a federal indictment on fraud and Obama is secretly hoping that no one will notice any of these connections. Once he gets the nomination, it might be too late. I think he should be desqualified from the race. I do not agree with far right violent radicals who will bomb abortion clinics and kill adult innocent lives in the fight for right to life. What an irony! I will also not support a violent radical left who will bomb and terrorize Americans on the home front to protest a war. None of it makes sense. Nader seems to be preparing to take Obama down with a line of interesting questions. If you don't beleive me check out the research on the Weather Underground members, Ayers and Dorhn, who say they would bomb again in the name of stopping the war. Check out the connections with Rezco, etc., etc., etc.!
My vote will be for Hillary Clinton or sway the vote elsewhere. End the war with the correct intentions by making the Iraqis take responsibility for their own country. Use the money to invest in the future of the American people and their needs, especially health care.
Only Hillary will get my vote in the democtatic race. The most deceptive candidate is Obama. Is that why he is the most unaccessible to the press and only gets good reviews. This is a bias against Hillary. Don't buy into this deceptiveness, I challenge you the voters to do the research.
Here are some links to check out some of the information that I found so far.
http://www.counterpunch.org/gonzalez02292008.html
http://discerningtexan.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-tied-to-unrepentant-weather.html
http://www.humanevents.com/offers/offer.php?id=bho101
http://obama.senate.gov/record/051108-s1975_deceptive_practices_and_voter_intimidation_prevention_act_of_2005/index.html
http://www.reformer.com/ci_8356591?source=most_viewed
The above includes the blog from the Canadian woman. The first comment is from Cassandra Bolton.
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/brattleboro-reformer/TB1K3HPRA03NA6G1N
"My family and I have spent a great deal of time observing both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. We have read their policy proposals and compared them side by side. My husband attended an Obama rally and we both attended a Hillary townhall. More importantly, we have watched the evolution of both campaigns and we are not pleased with Obama's welcoming Republicans to change their registration and "Be a Democrat For a Day". Surely Obama knows that many of those Republicans will re-register with the Republican Party in November and vote against him. These are tactics that undermine the Democratic Party and we strongly disapprove.
Hillary Clinton is the best choice for the American people, and also for the international community."
March 1, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment