Does the fact that they're now thought of as "The Clintons" again bother anybody else?

In the first phase of the campaign, it was Hillary. She was the candidate front and center. Obviously, Bill was a factor too, simply by his existance as her spouse. But the campaign spotlight was on Hillary.

But now it is more often "The Clintons." The tag team. Bill front and center, doing his narcissistic, spinning thing.

It's become quite evident that the candidate is not Hillary the individual, but a return of the former First Couple.

Makes me proud!

It's like the Freeper armory has been raided and is now in use here at DU. I have heard nearly no substantive arguments of any kind in several days.

It's all "Hillary and Bill are meanies!" over and over.

--p!

If you don't support us and our agenda, you are a "traitor" ...

Haven't we had enough of this? We lived it for the last 8 years.

Can the first invocation of "Hitler" be far behind?

I have a friend who is named for an uncle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leone_Ginzburg">Leone Ginzburg) who died under fascism in Italy in the 1940s. The guy was tortured to death over the course of a month by the Fascisti and Nazi "consultants" from Germany. He was used as an object-lesson and warning to the European left.

That's fascism.

The common way the real-world Fascists would "warn" an enemy was to force about a quart of mineral oil down the victim's throat, then whip them with a metal rod until their ass was bloody and torn down to the muscle. The three days or so of convulsive defecation that resulted from the oil would cause massive and painful infections that often persisted for months, sometimes killing the victim.

That's fascism.

Getting one's feelings hurt in a primary dustup is NOT fascism.

--p!

Each have specific roles and its by very careful design. Frankly, this "co-presidency" by the Clintons has the chance of being violative of the constitution and cause a lot of problems down the road when trying to bridge the massive divide between the aisles in congress that have to be healed so that we can get something done in this country.

the media should just call them billary from now on. its essentially what it is. i'm surprised obama has done so well taking on this juggernaut.

Who is running? It's not very clear anymore. Are people going to vote for Hillary to get Bill back into the White House? Are they even listening to Hillary anymore? It's really bizarre, and every time it's brought up, the blanket answer from them is that the spouses are all campaigning. A non-answer. It's pretty creepy.

I think people love to hate them, especially when they're seen as The Clintons rather than individuals. And the media is pushing that like crazy right now.

Mika is ON !!!:9 :9
:bounce:

Casual? or just pooped-out?

requires help from him. It's obvious and disturbing. Who in their right mind would want to be VP with this tag team, and what could a vp accomplish with this echo?

instead prefering endless personal attacks and smears on others

happening with the big dawg in the picture. Don't you see? That's part of the plan! :think:

YOUR personal stab deserved a touche'.

My hero, Colonel Hal Moore, a real "flip-flopper" who changed tactics at LZ X-ray and annihilated 1,965 PAVN with only 395 1st Air Cav troopers. He's relevant because so many Hillary supporters like to SMEAR John Kerry.

Here's some Jewelry you are UNfamiliar with..
It's called the Silver Star.

I don't think that's in Bill or Hill's jewelry box?

Every person running for anything anywhere must have supporters. Big important supporters are the best.

It's just nonsense to think that Bill Clinton should sit this election out. Can you imagine what that would do??! For goodness sake, not a minute would go by without someone deriding a woman who can't even get her own husband to speak well of her.

They have been since they got married. Some people are waaaayyy to influenced by the media.

occasional speech and pull some strings behind the scenes, but not be out front and sharing the limelight like this. Guess I just didn't know the "real" Bill. ;) In retrospect, Hillary is using whatever "weapons" she has and Bill is certainly an effective one (once he decided not to be constrained by any tradition of an "ex-president"'s role in his party's primary). I am assuming here that it was Hillary's decision for Bill to be "out there", not just "Bill being Bill".

The bitching about "Hillary" "Mrs. Clinton" and now "The Clintons", all legitimate designations, is silly. And as has been often said: "Don't care what you call me, so long as you call"

and that is how they function.

if it bothers anyone else because HRC is breathing air? Has about as much substance, and sounds just as silly. If I may do a service for those who's grasp of recent history seems to have escaped them, the Clintons have been known as "the Clintons", from the day they exchanged vows. I thought most people knew that, especially as well informed as DU is supposed to be. Imagine that. Thanks.
quickesst

Sigh.

and a ditto on the "sigh". I'll have to remind my parents that when they send me a holiday card addressed to the "Smiths", it would be my democratic, and progressive duty to inform them that they have now been classified as sexist. At their age, however, they might consider that a compliment.:woohoo: 93 and 86, or is it sexist to give my dad's age first. Gotta be careful where you step these days. Thanks.
quickesst

Smiths or Joneses wouldn't be very accurate, so I guess the Clintons will have to suffice.

What a silly thing to be upset about.

since the day that hillary was given the healthcare reform it`s been bill and hillary presidency. she is running for president on her experience and knowledge she gained during those 8 years so it is fair to say she was a co-president

I suppose if I'd actually heard that phrase it would bother me.

No--come to think of it, actually it wouldn't bother me. At all. No big deal. People want labels on everything, from canned good to families-- regardless of whether those labels are apt and valid, or just another right wing radio talking point.

"experience" argument.

And, actually believe it.

When it was just Hillary running, this question was probably "there" but subdued way down in the collective psyche, but now that Bill has been front and center, red-faced, angry, twisting another man's words and getting caught doing it, that question is bubbling to the top in a lot of Americans minds.

Your post is very poignant and extremely relevant.

Before Bill began to be the candidate, Hillary was being judged on her own merits. Not anymore.

Now the images of the "blue dress" and Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Linda Tripp and all that sordid shit has been jarred back into the public's mind.

And I think that it will be enough now to prevent her from ever being elected in November. Bill and Hillary may be able to game the primaries and get the nomination so they can live again in the White House, but they can't game enough for the General Election.

We are marching off a cliff in putting this couple at the top of our ticket.

I hope that Barack and John can somehow hold them off from taking the party down with their ambition.

This time we're starting a campaign with a couple who most of the country was really tired of already. (Had they not been, Gore would be President today.)

So by nominating The Clintons we're already stacking the deck against ourselves at the beginning. And the GOp will make plenty of hay from all that.

Ironically, either McCain or Romney or Rudy will likely be perceived as the "change" candidate in the General Election.

I just don't want to go back to the 1990's and all they put us through.

Therefore it's easier,faster and smoother to say the Clintons than Hillary and Bill Clinton. Makes sense to me! :shrug:

In fact, the myth was successfully sold from left to right that the semi-literate son was something other than the new frontman of the criminal organization started by the father.

At least with "The Clintons" everyone knows they're electing the same clan as before.