Latest

Lobby

Search

Options

Help

Login

"Two against one" in Clintons' vs Obama campaign

Printer-friendly format

Email this thread to a friend

Bookmark this thread

This topic is archived.

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:33 PM
Original message

"Two against one" in Clintons' vs Obama campaign

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 04:33 PM by ProSense

"Two against one" in Clintons' vs Obama campaign

By Steve Holland
45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In 1992 Bill Clinton vowed Americans would get "two for the price of one" if they elected him with wife Hillary at his side. Now it is two against one as the Clintons gang up on Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential race.

Bill Clinton, whose eight years as president in the 1990s are remembered fondly by many Democrats despite the drama of his Monica Lewinsky scandal, has gone from top dog to attack dog on the campaign trail on behalf of his wife.

The former president went negative against Obama in New Hampshire early this month, angrily accusing the news media of not looking more deeply into the "fairy tale" of Obama's record on Iraq as an Illinois senator.

In South Carolina this week, he is trying to make Obama pay for comments he made last week in Nevada about the late President Ronald Reagan, a Republican icon held in disdain by many Democrats.

<...>

'TRIANGULATION'

An Obama supporter and ex-presidential candidate himself, former New Jersey Sen. Bill Bradley said Bill Clinton is conveniently ignoring his own presidential past of "triangulation," adopting some Republican ideas in order to get re-elected in 1996.

"It was indeed in the Clinton administration ... that the whole concept of triangulation took place, which means appearing to be Republican to enough people to get elected, and that's what happened," Bradley told MSNBC.

more

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Dogmudgeon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:36 PM
Response to Original message

1. Another Obama-surrogate blogger

Is that all they can do, attack Hillary?

--p!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

polichick

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:36 PM
Response to Original message

2. Bill Clinton's new nickname could be "The Fixer"

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 04:46 PM by polichick

If Obama is smart, he'll stay above it and let surrogates take Bill on ~ that would really rile him.

(That said, Barack should never have trashed Clinton's presidency.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JackORoses

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #2

12. Bill's Presidency was not Transformational. That is Truth not trash.

If it had been transformational, those 8 years would have been more than just a speedbump on the Republican Road that we've been on since 1980.

If it had been transformational, we would never have had to suffer under the rule of George W Bush.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

polichick

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #12

21. Even so, elevating Reagan over Clinton was like...

...poking a BIG DOG with a stick ~ no surprise that he got a chunk taken outta his butt!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JackORoses

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #21

45. the Big Dog needs to be poked. He still has not answered for many of his past mistakes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ccpup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:39 PM
Response to Original message

3. keep complaining to the Press, Obama

the more you whine, the more inexperienced and out-of-your-league you look.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PDittie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:40 PM
Response to Original message

4. Who won the debate?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pampango

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:45 PM
Response to Original message

5. I have to admit that six months ago it never occurred to me that Bill

would play such a large role in the primary campaign. My guess that many at DU are not surprised and expected that all along. There's never been an ex-president who was so involved in a primary campaign, but, of course, there's never been an ex-president's spouse running for the office.

I would not be a good campaign strategist, because I would not have predicted this. My thought was that Bill would be something like Bush, Sr. in the 2000 campaign, when his son was running. Maybe make the occasional speech, pull some strings behind the scenes, but basically stay in the background. I have no idea if Bill's much more public role is his idea, her idea, or a joint decision on their part. I just know I didn't see it coming. (Guess you could say I don't know the "real" Bill.) :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Whisp

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #5

22. I'm beginning to think that Hillary is just his sockpuppet.

That it is He that is really going to run things in that town and this is the only way to do it. I'm getting the unpleasant impression that, for all the charges of sexism toward a woman running for pres., it's her husband himself who is the mysoginist dork here.

'Protecting' the little woman and what all with that ruffled rooster act.
Any positive credit that Hillary maybe should be given to some of her own work takes a background to his presidency and super ego.
and meanwhile probably still sleeping around like the little **** he is and nudge nudge wink winking to his boy pals.

he's looking creepier to me all the time. I want to slap him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Imagevision

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:48 PM
Response to Original message

6. Obama camp should run the "I didn't have sex with that woman" clip -->24/7

I trust Bill Clinton as Much as I trust Cheney...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mitchtv

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #6

7. that sounds like about as much as I trust Obama!

maybe he can get GOP help to run those ads.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigdarryl

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #6

9. I agree if the Clintons want to play DIRTY he should also get Wanita Brodderick who claimed

Bill RAPED her

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KennedyGuy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. Wanita? You a freeper Wannabe?

Dear God...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #11

14. Dish it out but can't take it, eh?

Pff.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #14

25. It would be great for the Obama campaign to dish that out.

His campaign would sink like a stone.

But in all likelihood he won't so we'll just have to wait for one of the three to win.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #25

29. Right, he won't.

He's got more class.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #29

30. And more sense and self interest too.

But maybe he can send that classy Donnie McClurkin to say something, just the same. He'll pick up some votes that way.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #30

32. Hey...

maybe he can get the support of that guy who signed all that homophobic legislation into law...

Oh, wait. Hillary already married him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #32

37. Just as well. I don't think Clinton would have been homophobic enough for

that segment of Obama's market. After all, he let gays serve in the military - it never ocurred to him to Pray the Gay Away.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #37

38. Oh, I doubt it.

Bill Clinton did a lot more harm to homosexuals than some irrelevant gospel singer ever did.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #38

39. Ah, but not nearly as much harm as a president beholden to religious bigots

has the potential to do. :-)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #39

40. Beholden?

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 08:32 PM by Bornaginhooligan

Hillary Clinton married one.

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #40

42. Nah.

Bill Clinton made one bad mis-step because he thought he needed to. And it didn't harm a single person because no state had same sex marriage anyway.

But Obama now has multiple links to some Pray The Gay Away types, and will certainly need to keep them happy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #42

43. LOL

"one bad misstep."

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KennedyGuy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #14

31. its hard to take a boob like you seriously when you can't even spell Wanita..

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 08:07 PM by KennedyGuy

Its Juanita you moron...
mis-spelling simple words is a typical freeper trait.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

HiFructosePronSyrup

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #31

35. It'd take a pre-literate cro-magnon like you...

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 08:16 PM by Bornaginhooligan

to think that I was the one who said "Wanita."

Well, no, not really. Anybody can make a mistake.

But it takes a special kind of stupid to make as many as you do.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KennedyGuy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #35

36. Apology accepted..

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Rageneau

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #9

17. Ron Reagan raped a woman, too.

But there was no money nor political power to be gained in exposing it, so it got hushed up.

But the testimony from the woman is on record and -- unlike Juanita -- she did not come 20 years after the supposed event took place. She made the accusation contemporaneously but -- like Juanita -- never pressed charges.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #9

19. Do you think that would help the Obama ticket get more votes than Clinton?

Do you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #6

18. Do you think that would help him get more votes?

?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BenDavid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #6

20. yeah bring out all that and watch hrc win every state on 2/5..

the american people tried hard to tell the right not to impeach clinton but they did not listen to them and bill kept right on doing his job as president and his favorability rose to 70% with a year or better to go in office. So go ahead run it all....Hey go for it......

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TwilightZone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #6

23. Clinton's ratings went up post-impeachment.

So, I'm not so sure that's such a good idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 06:47 PM
Response to Original message

8. Kick! n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

KennedyGuy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 06:53 PM
Response to Original message

10. Waaaaaaaahhh,,they're picking on meeeeeeee.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #10

13. Here:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

AtomicKitten

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:17 PM
Response to Original message

15. K&R for the two-fer tag-team.

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 07:18 PM by AtomicKitten

Bah-bye.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Sparkly

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:19 PM
Response to Original message

16. This is not surprising.

I said the same when Clinton was being attacked, and her campaign pointed it out.

A candidate will be attacked -- especially if they're seen as a frontrunner, and right now Obama and Clinton are pretty much tied for that spot.

The candidate and his/her campaign then points out that they're being attacked.

In Clinton's case, everybody insists she's "playing victim," and "playing the gender card." :eyes: That was the only thing new here.

The usual response is just, "If they can't handle this, how will they deal with the Republicans?" And too much complaining about attacks can start to seem weak.

So, it's not surprising that Obama's campaign would say, "I'm being attacked by TWO of them!" Especially since people love to hate The Clintons, especially as The Clintons (rather than either one of them alone).

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DallasCowboy

(15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:46 PM
Response to Original message

24. the first woman with a shot at becoming president is so openly dependent on her husband

Maureen Dowd had the same headline today: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/opinion/23dowd.html?em&ex=1201237200&en=3dcf15682936eacb&ei=5087%0A

Best Line: It�s odd that the first woman with a shot at becoming president is so openly dependent on her husband to drag her over the finish line.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Omega3

(412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #24

28. this is bull

all the spouses are activly campainging for their others side, it's just that Hillary's husband happens to be the ex-Prez, so he'll get more attention. But everybody is right, Obama needs to be smart enough to let his surrogates attact Bill Clinton instead of doing it himself. He's showing his inexperience, if this is how he handles the pressure now wait till the GOP gets at him. It won't be pretty.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

David Zephyr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #24

33. Welcome to the DU, DallasCowboy. It's not helping her show her "leaderhip" skills.

I think it has undercut her since Bill has taken over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Cha

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:49 PM
Response to Original message

26. Well, this non expert feels the same..

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 07:53 PM by zidzi

"So Barack Obama isn't supporting the ideas of Republicans. Bill Clinton actually took the ideas of Republicans and used them in a Democratic way to get re-elected," Bradley said.

Bill Clinton's attacking role has gotten many political experts wondering whether New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's reliance on her husband will sooner or later backfire on her in her drive to become the first woman U.S. president.

*Reign the big attack dog in..and run yourself, hilary..ya got the goods, doncha?

"Clinton's current role confirms my ongoing reservations about whether the nation can deal with two presidents in the White House -- one of them elected and the other retired," said Linda Fowler, a professor of government at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire.

Democrats hold a natural advantage this year with many Americans fatigued of the two-term George W. Bush White House, but the Bill Clinton role is an intangible that could affect voter thinking, experts believe."

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patchuli

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 07:56 PM
Response to Original message

27. Really? How did Obama think Opra shilling for him looked?! nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

CatWoman

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:08 PM
Response to Original message

34. *BEEP BEEP BEEP*

Does not compute

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

Control+Alt+Delete

*BEEP BEEP BEEP*

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jan-24-08 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #34

47. Kick! n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Perry Logan

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:33 PM
Response to Original message

41. It would help if they'd show us exactly which rule Bill is breaking.

Edited on Wed Jan-23-08 08:33 PM by Perry Logan

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mondo joe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-23-08 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #41

44. Bill is cheating - like this.

My partner grew up playing a game called Canfield (sp?). His whole family play like crazy - crazy fast and crazy competitive.

I tried to play him a few times but he's so fast it's impossible. The last time we played I got really pissed and yelled "you're cheating!"

Naturally he asked how he was cheating, and though it wasn't factually cheating I had to confess to my feelings: "You're playing too fast!"

Same thing here. Hillary has too good an asset and they're scrambling to figure out how to counter it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ProSense

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jan-24-08 12:15 AM
Response to Original message

46. Kick! n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 01st 2024, 03:54 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate

About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC