It's the people, stupid!

I know this diary wont go over well here as it's a bit assertive and aggressive against Senator Clinton, but she seems to be whole heartedly missing the point on the most important issue of the day and she, her campaign and her most ardent supporters seem to be missing the boat simply to play `gotcha' politics and play the umbrage, faux outrage game.

With all this flap about the bitter-gate going around, its amazing to me that Clinton and her compaign can be so pathologically tone deaf to the electorates feelings as to try and use this as an attack against Obama.  She and her campaign are going to learn very quickly about the error of their ways.

I will ignore the media and McCain's use of this issue as they have different vested interests in making anything an issue and for most voters they see these for what they are and ignore them (for the most part).

So I will only focus on how this issue really hurts Clinton and how she is digging her own grave.

I will start with the supposition that Obama's original comments were, shall we say, not very well crafted, especially for someone whose cred is on word craft.  That said, the content of the comments themselves is quite accurate, he simply put the mood of the country in an inarticulate way with a poor choice of words.

And from most reporting on the issue where actual people were asked their thoughts (not us chattering class) I've heard basically the following `yup, that about sums it up'.  It's only the chattering class and those with a vested interest that want to take umbrage, Joe Sixpack seems to be saying `sounds right'.

81% of the people in this country right now believe the country is on the wrong course.  Clinton is one of the biggest Washington insiders and hasn't lived in the real world for a long, long, long time.

Clinton has been essentially running on a 2 for 1 platform and taking her husbands accomplishments as her own and his experience as hers, using 35 years of Washington insider experience as her mantra - touting her political fighting acumen, her heavy weight connections, her ability to know the system and work within the system.  What she doesn't realize is when times are tough and the chips are down people don't like that system and don't want another person who knows how to work that system.  They want someone to challenge that system.

What Clinton doesn't understand (bafflingly since it's what got them into the white house in the first place) is that when things are bad, people want change, and they get frustrated and, oh dare I say, `bitter'.  And when they want change, the last thing they want is an insider or an insider telling them how and how not to feel.

The problem for Clinton is, Obama may have accidentally just hit on the winning theme of his candidacy.  Obama has already been running on `hope and change' and as the essential outsider which he gets to own with the most credibility.  But Obama hasn't really addressed, yet, why hope and change are important right now and what is lying underneath to make it so appealing.  He hasn't really pulled back the façade to show the raw emotions that most of us have underneath about how badly we feel our country is suffering right now.  

So Obama's inartful comments actually started to address this and brought them out to the forefront.  And you know what the funny thing is?  Most people actually feel that way and agree.

And yet Clinton is so tone deaf to the electorate that she manufactures outrage over this perceived slight and may have inadvertently just given Obama the opening he needs to lay those feelings bare and take ownership of them as the real candidate who can make a difference.

But essentially, Clinton is handing Obama the greatest gift imaginable - the number one issue of the election - sadness and outrage over the direction of the country.

The rest is my opinion, slightly amplified, but tenuously possible.

Clinton's manufactured outrage will backfire in epic proportions and here's why.  When outrage is manufactured (and pushed as hard as she is pushing it) over real issues, she is, by default, dismissing the issues as being invalid.  That's fine if the issues are actually invalid.  The problem for her, though, is the issues are more than valid.  Further more, when those problems are based on core emotions, to dismiss them or use them politically is always seen as slimy and untoward.  And these issues are the best reading of the electorate's temperature right now - and that's both democrats and republicans.  So she is manufacturing outrage against an actual issue, the core issue.

Obama has been smart up until now not to actively use these hard feelings in his pitch.  He has been vague and touchy feely about hope and change but hasn't really gone too far into why `hope and change' are so important right now.  If Obama had gone into the darker side of why `hope and change' were important from the beginning he would have seemed to be an opportunist or an angry man.  He would have been seen to be using people's feelings.  But now that Clinton has opened the door to truthfully address them, Obama now gets to jump in and take it on board fully and use it because he is responding, not advocating or using.

Obama's remarks hit a chord, a chord of anger, bitterness and frustration that exists in the electorate and if he can stay away from `angry' rhetoric in his response and is reasonable in expanding on his point, he is going to score like nobody's business.

Seriously, Clinton just essentially gave Obama the main issue of the election on a silver platter.  And not just gave it away, but is aggressively giving it away and trying to somehow say it doesn't exist.  At times I wonder if she is this tone deaf and out of touch?

Now here's how Obama capitalizes - wait for the debate.  Let Clinton and her tone deaf campaign keep pushing this issue and let Obama rationally, quietly and dispassionately keep clarifying his stance.  Again, it's not like Obama said something inaccurate or hateful, he just didn't say it artfully.  All Obama needs is the right platform to put all the cards on the table in an artful manner, and we know when he does that, he knocks `em dead.

And when might a good chance coming up?  Hmmmmmm, I'm not sure, but isn't there a debate or something coming up?

You know as Clinton and the media are pushing this issue that it is going to be the topic du jour at the debate.  All I hope is that Clinton gets to go first.  You know she will not be able to resist her natural temptation to poke at Obama and take jabs.  And then, the microphone will turn to Obama....

And in front of a nationally televised audience he will get a chance to put his words right, as he always does, and he will take full ownership of the issue and tie it all together and knock it out of the park.

Because when it all boils down, this isn't about Obama saying something wrong, its about Obama hitting a chord but just having used ill fitting words.  And when Obama gets a chance to use the right words, he is dynamite.

So to me, Clinton is giving Obama the biggest present of all - ownership of the most important issue of the election - `it's the people stupid'.

So Senator Clinton, please, please, please keep this issue alive in your petty and spiteful way.  Please keep digging your own grave.  The more you talk about it, the more Obama owns this issue and the key to defeating you and the republicans.  You will seem more and more out of touch with the economic reality of the US and the electorate themselves.  You will look like the ostrich with their head buried in the sand sadly replaying your boy who cried wolf game.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know what youre going to say - 'another speech, how great' dripping with wonderfully droll and sacrastic tones, but the reality is, Obama will be articulate, thoughtful and sincere and he will benefit greatly from it.  As Ive said before, Clinton and McCain would kill for one tenth of that speech making ability.

Its a real issue and it runs deep - `it's the people stupid'.



Display:


Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 6)

When Sen. Obama accuses Sen. Clinton of being Annie Oakley he is not being petty, he is using his new brand of hope and change, however, when Sen. Clinton or anyone else holds Sen. Obama for his own words, which he acknowledges are important that is being divisive.

Well this is one voter who is not buying this line of argument. He has not closed the deal with voters because he is as divisive a candidate as I have seen.


"The Bumble Bee flies because it thinks it can."
by LadyEagle on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:02:24 PM EST

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 0)

So, you're saying he's the only candidate you've ever seen?

Actually, I'd say his divisiveness, that you lament, comes from the old guard of the Democratic party and Clinton supporters who were expecting a coronation, not a primary race, and don't appreciate being rudely mistaken. Truly, there's things you could say about Senator Obama, but trying to drive a rift in the Democratic party isn't a quality that he possesses.

Note the emphasis.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:05:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Obviously you're elitist, because you said that with the caveat that, of course, you understand everything.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:25:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Annie Oakley? ROTFLMAO! That is a stupid comment. Only an egghead would use Annie Oakley as a comparison.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:14:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 1)

Interesting Senator Clinton would help that along, don't you think?


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:03:35 PM EST

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 0)

She didn't point to it. She used it.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:10:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 0)

Sure there is. Because it's a bogus slander; he's not elitist, and you're taking his meaning out of context with the precise intention of using it as a cudgel against him with the "elitist" slander the Republicans have been using. The fact you consider your candidate to be the antithesis of elite is laughable, as well.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:23:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 1)

Again, take note- Clinton supporters like ATL here are dismissive when backed into a corner, and insult other people personally. They dehumanize Obama supporters, and Obama himself. We have no real reasons to support him, anything we feel isn't legitimate, we're robots, elitists, latte-drinking, etc, etc.

Whereas while I may disagree with him, I will never, ever claim his reasons for supporting Clinton are less than genuine, or that he's suffering some sort of delusion by supporting her.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:29:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He May Not Be "Elitist" (2.00 / 1)

but he damn sure sounds like it.

Hence ATL's contributions on perception.


by creeper1014 on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 11:14:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Um who cares about it's impact in the GE.

Since the key to the GE is the moderate suburbanites who voted for Bush I can't see how this matters at all


by CaptMorgan on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:37:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Um did you not understand what I was saying?  To win PA in the GE we simply have to win suburban voters... that's it.  Same with ohio.


by CaptMorgan on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:53:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 1)

To prevent another Democratic loss, perhaps? I wouldnt' characterize this as 'playing along.'


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:11:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Sigh.

I really don't think you guys would appreciate it if Senator Obama were to act in this manner, with the caveat that it was all to prevent the Democrats from losing in November.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:17:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 1)

Obviously it plays to her political advantage to keep this in the news, but it's also been quite proven that when Democrats are painted as elitist, effete snobs, they lose. The only Democrats they haven't done that to recently was Jimmy and Billy.


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:24:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Except that's not what Obama was trying to get across. You can argue that's what it came out like, but you can't argue that's what he meant. And if Clinton had parsed it in an argument like that, it'd be one thing. But she outright accused him of being elitist, and purposefully took the misinterpretation and ran with it. For political gain, as you note.

But this may all end up working in Obama's favor. We'll have to see how it plays out.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:31:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

I now wonder what it was he is trying to get across because tonight during the CNN "Compassion" forum (seriously, what a lame name for a forum) he reiterated his stance that clinging to something is a good thing, and not really explaining exactly what he meant. I really wanted to hear more from him on this, but he didn't really explain.

I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but tonight didn't help. Hopefully the debate will bring out what he meant some more.


"If we can't live together... we're going to die alone."
by VAAlex on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:45:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (1.50 / 2)

This is the idiocy I see from Obama supporters constantly. Somehow it's Hillary fault that Obama's an elitist snob. Well, Obama did it to himself. Obama also did it to himself with Rev. Wright. Or do you somehow believe that Hillary made him sit in the pews for 20 years and listen to that garbage?


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:12:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 0)

Thanks for calling Obama supporters idiots. Undecided voters take note, this is what Clinton supporters think of anyone who disagrees with them.

But in answer to your question, I suppose you wouldn't consider Clinton elitist. No, Obama is, no doubt about it. You're not beating a dead (and unrelated) horse to prove it, either, nosiree.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:18:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 0)

Sorry. There's no vocal undecided voters, but there are plenty of lurkers around. Take a look at people who get mojo, and see how many of those giving it have ever posted a diary, or commented. Those are the undecided lurkers, and your actions speak volumes to them.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:25:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Is spewing idiocy the same thing as being an idiot? Not in my book. Quit with the hysteria. You have to admit that it's pretty idiotic behavior to blame Hillary for Obama's own bad judgement.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 08:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are right (2.00 / 3)

It is the people stupid and the people see through Obama and are moving back to Hillary, the one who fights for them, not above them.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:05:32 PM EST

Re: You are right (none / 0)

In the end, I guess you and I will probably agree to disagree.  

To be honest, Ive never seen Hillary as 'the one who fights for them (the people)' and that she is 'not above them'.

I read a statement like that, and sorry to admit it, I laugh with incredulity.

Dont get me wrong.  Obama is no savior and hes in this for the same reasons and if Clinton wins the nom I'll vote for her.

But my points or more to the campaign and campaign styles and messages.  Clinton just seems to always take a path which seems so strange that it puts me off.

She has had a couple of opportunities to take a hot button issue (race with Wright) and bitterness (now) and her first intuition is to attack (or not defend as in the case of Wright) instead of going to forefront and tackling the subject in an honest and heartfelt way.  Its her 'fighter' persona, that some seem to love so much, that seems to keep her from being able to honestly and sypathetically tackle tough issues which require nuance and foresight.  So she attacks and pokes instead of seeing the core issue, addressing it and taking ownership or stewardship of it.  While her supporters seem to love it, many people find it offputting and cynical, hence the charges of 'say anything to win'.

It just seems Clinton keeps missing the heart of the issues and cant quite connect.  Truth be told, Obama is only connecting a little bit more.  I appreciate the unease some people have with him, its a valid point to make.

But for Hillary to use out of touch and elitist charges against him is so asinine its comical.  She is the insiders insider with all the money and power behind her.  She is the ultimate elite, she is political royalty and has the establishment behind her.  Only her supoprters dont laugh at her face when she makes silly charges like this.

Trust me, she is fighting for one person, herself.  As is Obama.

Im not trying to be a smart a** or put down your views.  Its just that some of the hard core supporters on both sides seem so out of touch with reality, they are so wrapped in their love for their candidate that they cant see the forrest through the trees.  Maybe sometimes I am like that and can take a bit too much glee when I see an opening for my candidate, but when pushed I try and come back and be a bit more balanced.

I hope I didnt offend you and if I did, I am sorry.


by pattonbt on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 11:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (2.00 / 2)

Well then, you should change the title of the diary, because Hillary is all about the people.  


by LindaSFNM on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:08:45 PM EST

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

I know this diary wont go over well here

Probably not.

But I think you're mostly right about the solid core of unhappiness in this country.  Senator Clinton may very well overplay her hand.  We'll have to see how much restraint is employed, and when.


You haven't seen impatient until you've seen a monkey waiting for a donut.
by bjones on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:12:42 PM EST

good point (none / 0)

by the ge this latest little snipet that hillary is trying to exploit will come full circle to obama's advantage.


by citizendave on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:21:02 PM EST

Re: good point (2.00 / 0)

have you read the diary?
i agree that obama will be forced to beat this one to death: on the stump at debates etc. he will own this like he own race relations.

perhaps you might try smoking something and might i suggest "dark side of the moon" turned up loud.


by citizendave on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:42:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: good point (none / 0)

hey i just noticed that you dropped the old "controled substance" thing above as well.

stop being an asshole. you're making hillary look bad.


by citizendave on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:47:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I dont know if (none / 0)

Id go so far as the great Satan, I certainly dont prefer Clinton but have said many times if its between her and McCain my interests are dem first and I'll vote for her, but sometimes she is so amazingly out of it, in my opinion, that I question where her head is at.

I mean she really seems to be so eager to find anything she can take umbrage with and engage in faux anger over that she manufactures something into something its not.

Dont get me wrong, this is politics and Obama rightfully should take a hit for his clumsiness.  But Clinton is going to make a big mistake by pushing it so hard.  I dont see how it helps her in the long run.  It seems she'll get a day or twos milage out of it and then it will blow up in her face.

I believe she is accidentally playing into Obama's hand.  Since Obama's comments were more 'misspaking' to use a Clintonism than an outright slur or denigration, its not like he was being mean spirited.  He was just too casual.

And what Hillary has failed to notice is that every time Obama gets a chance to clarify, he hits a home run.

I mean look at Wright, there was some great foment and Obama then gives a great speech on faith and race and he is praised across the board (of course I admit the repiblicans will attack him on this and other stuff as they will attack Clinton on everything else).

Obama is not a saint, a savior or a new paradigm shift in the way politics are done.  He is simply the candidate of change in an environment that wants change.  He is also a tremendous orator, which for whatever your opinion, is a highly prized gift for a politician, and one who campaigns on change.

So I guess Im saying is all Hillary is doing by pushing this so hard, when it wasnt anything but a clumsy statement, is she is going to end up giving him the ideal platform to take this issue home.

I mean this is nowhere near the level of Wright and yet this gives Obama another chance to make a great speech on an important topic.

It amazes me that Clinton and her supporters cant see how by denying this and not embracing it themselves more artfully they are conceding a tremdous issue.

Who knows though, maybe it has legs, maybe it could doom Obama.  I doubt it, though, and I honestly see more room for backfire than anything else since most people really dont like where the country is heading and Obama now gets to own that feeling as part of his campaign if he is smart.  Thats a win win for him as far as I am concerned.


by pattonbt on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:29:17 PM EST

Re: It's the people, stupid! (1.00 / 1)

Who cares how this plays in the GE?

Are people just delusional here?  All we have to do to win the GE is convert some of the suburban moderates who voted for Bush.  These people are generally socially liberal, but economically conservative...They also are very disturbed by the influence of the religious right on the republican party.

These people are also disgusted with Bush and will be much easier to win over than the rural voters (and hey I'd love to have them too.. but we don't need them to win)


by CaptMorgan on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:35:29 PM EST

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

I think you being up an important point - its democrats AND republicans who feel like this.

There are many, many decent republicans out their who are so dismayed right now that they really see themselves voting democrat for the first time in a long time.

Obama is striking a chord with them and dems on this issue and can really take it home if he is smart.


by pattonbt on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:49:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's the people, stupid! (none / 0)

Yup... I live by these people here in dupage county IL.  These people won't give a crap about these comments because they have nothing to do with them.. and they'll be easy to win over because they are disgusted by the iraq war... just gotta win the suburbs and the GE will be a cakewalk


by CaptMorgan on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 11:16:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Personally (none / 0)

I think this whole elitist thing is a load of bunk.  It just seems to be a tacky characterization (and ill-fitting one as well).  If anything Obama is the populist and Clinton is the elitist.  But I could care less if either are 'elitist' as long as they act like dems and have a passion about them.

The reason Kerry and Gore got hit with elitist is due to their public personas.  Neither had fire, passion or personality.  They appeared to be blank slate politicians who lived in ivory towers of dullness and policy.

Neither of them had anything inspirational about them.  I passionately disliked both of them as presidential candidates (but love both of them as dems and think they have their roles to fill - Kerry in the senate and Gore now as the elder statesman and environmental leader) and thought they would lose (my prefs were Bradley and Dean).

The reason why elite wont hold against Obama is so readily apparent its silly.  He is passionate and comes from the same kind of background as Bill did.  He has no silver spoon.  Obama is not an elitist, he is a populist.  He comes off as intelligent and cold sometimes, but can also bring a fire when needed.  So he can effectively counter that aloofness that Kerry and Gore had.  He, like Bill, is great on the trail.  Just look at how enthusiatic his supporters are at their rallies and you can see energy and fire.  Hardly traits associated with an elitist.

He is no wet blanket academic.  So I really dont think the elitist charge will stick.

But again, we will see how it pans out.


by pattonbt on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 10:46:56 PM EST

"Gotcha politics" (2.00 / 1)

Now just who was it that deployed that game in this election cycle in the first place?

And you excoriate Clinton for calling Obama out on his 'gaffe', which some of us see as not a 'poor choice of words', but rather a subliminal outpouring of his true feelings towards 'typical white people'? (before you rant about my being racist for the usage of that term, remember your candidate said it first)

Here's "gotcha politics" from a campaign for ya:

the mere mention of Jesse Jackson after Obama's SC win was 'racist';

the use of the term 'fairytale' in reference to Obama's record on Iraq is 'racist';

turn Hillary's praise for a Democratic President's signing of the Civil Rights Legislation into a 'racist' statement that somehow demeaned Dr King.

That's 'gotcha' politics, and we well know who plays the game that way.

It's about time she fought 'fire' with 'fire'.

After all, it's just 'words'.  If Obama can 'twist and shout', so can she.  What's wrong with her showing the country his words?


Hell's bells, even the GOP didn't have to crucify Eisenhower's record in order to make Reagan their 'saint'. We can have two great ones, you know?
by emsprater on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 11:19:59 PM EST

I never once (none / 0)

mentioned any of the above about race and wouldnt call you a racist, so Im not sure why thats directed at me, except in the general sense of my post.

First, lets be honest, fair or not, white political candidates have to tread very lightly around issues of race.  They are in a catch 22 with their statements.  It is a slippery slope.

My problem with the comments you mention is while I dont think there is any racism involved, the Clintons werent smart enough to get their points across without treading that fine line.  These are consumate professional politicians and they trapped themselves with careless words on a subject that is better left alone IF you are from the majority.  The problem with race arguments and gaffes is they carry a far heavier price than any other - just ask George Allen.

Whether that is 'fair' that Obama automatically gets that advantage is a larger sociological point is far and above politics.  To be honest, those comments you mention did give me some light cringe response, more so the LBJ comment.  I think I understand what Clinton was trying to say, but it was clumsy AND it referred to MLK which again, fair or not, can not in any way ignore the race overtones involved.

And again, I dont think the Clintons are racist, they are politicians and they goofed, badly in my opinion, on those.  What they didnt do is then take the high road and come out with a lofty rebuttal.  They played victim and affronted, not the best way to go.  So they took flak.

And I will say this, I am not excoriating Clinton for using this bitterness gaffe, all I am saying it will backfire on her badly.  The truth is I am a cynic and I have no problem with gutter politics, really I dont, its an unfortunate side of human nature.  I just think she is using it poorly and in such a fashion that she is giving a great gift to her opponent - a get out of jail free card if you will.

She and her campaign do not seem to be reading things too well and their reactions seem to miss the larger issue all the time.

It seems every time she has a chance to take on a lofty ideal as the front person, or take the high road on a gaffe and own the high side of the issue, she attacks and leaves the high road for her opponent.  Which in this election cycle is not terribly bright.

This is a change election cycle and people want change.  Clinton has had many opportunities to own some lofty ideals and at each juncture her tone deaf campaign has taken the wrong, but traditionally politically expedient, route.

I have no problem with Clinton showing the country Obama's words.  The problem she has is she left the door open for him to come back with the lofty argument and explanation instead of her seizing on the lofty argument AND calling him out on his words.

So, no, you are not a racist and neither are the Clintons, but the use of race is always a risk when running against a black politician, fair or not, and the default right side of race arguments is on the minorities side.  So I can see why Clinton got called out.

You would think she would have learned from that, but I guess not.  First instinct seems to be deny, second, attck, third pander.  

That just doesnt seem to be a smart strategy given the election cycle we are in.  2004?  That probably would have won the day.  I honestly believe that.  She would have won in 2004, her campaign style would have been perfect against Bush and she could have beat him.  And I believe she would beat McCain as well, I just dont think that tactic will work against Obama.


by pattonbt on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 12:02:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.