Obama Routs The Clinton Machine

[Pabster]

Obama Routs Clinton; Angry Rebuke From Bill

Angry Bill Clinton Compares Obama To Jesse Jackson

Looks like the Clinton machine is falling apart. I've never seen Bill so angry and careless with words.

 

[nageov3t]

isn't there already a thread about the SC primary?

 

[Moonbeam]

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

But I saw nothing about an angry Bill.

 

[Rainsford]

Well, Bill is from Arkansas...what do you expect?

In all seriousness, I'm not sure exactly what's going on with the Clinton's (let's be honest, it's not just Hillary running here) primary campaign. They are fighting pretty dirty, which seems like a mistake since Obama is a nice guy...and more importantly, he comes across as a nice guy to most of the voters. If/when Clinton wins the primary, I have no doubt that the dirty fighting will continue in the general election...but that's not what's going to hurt her. Let's face it, in a general election, most people are easily convinced that "the other guy" deserved all the nasty barbs flung his way. But while voters might ignore, or even approve of, Clinton taking McCain or Romney or whoever the pieces, what they're going to remember is the same attack machine being targeted at Obama...who has done nothing more than try to bring a positive message to a political process that has been missing one for a long time.

In other words, while the Clinton campaign machine will work well against the Republicans, using it against Obama might be a mistake. There is no Republican candidate who seems like anything but Dubya part II, nasty campaigning from their side of the aisle is pretty much a guarantee no matter who wins. But Obama was different, in a way that resonated with many voters. Attacking him the way the Clintons are, especially with the crypto-racist stuff, is going to highlight all that much more how much Hillary is more of the same just with a different gender.

The funny thing is that Obama would be the perfect general election candidate for this very reason, the typical dirty campaigning from the Republicans would backfire even more so in their case than in Hillary's case. I'm a Democrat and even I found Kerry to be a bit of a jackass...but Obama has the kind of nice guy approach that really might work in the general election. It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

 

[miketheidiot]

don't worry according to techs its obama that making this about race.

 

[ProfJohn]

From the ABC blog

Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question about Obama saying it "took two people to beat him." Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

I think Bill really went over the edge with that comment.

Jesse Jackson does not exactly have a stellar reputation outside the black community.

This could help us Republicans. If Bill keeps making these types of comments he might piss off enough blacks for them to stay home on election day. Also the Republican candidate might look at having JC Watts and Condi Rice running around campaigning for him in black areas to try and capture some of that vote themselves.

Hell... Mitt Romney can stand up in front of a black audience and say "I'm a Mormon, I know what it is like to be discriminated against by people who think you are different than them."

 

[SViscusi]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
From the ABC blog

Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question about Obama saying it "took two people to beat him." Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

I think Bill really went over the edge with that comment.

Jesse Jackson does not exactly have a stellar reputation outside the black community.

This could help us Republicans. If Bill keeps making these types of comments he might piss off enough blacks for them to stay home on election day. Also the Republican candidate might look at having JC Watts and Condi Rice running around campaigning for him in black areas to try and capture some of that vote themselves.

Hell... Mitt Romney can stand up in front of a black audience and say "I'm a Mormon, I know what it is like to be discriminated against by people who think you are different than them."

Hell the Romney family actually has civil rights cred, something that few other republicans can say.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Jesse Jackson does not exactly have a stellar reputation outside the black community.

Trust me, he doesn't have a stellar reputation inside it either :laugh:

I've heard blacks trash Jackson just as often as I do.

What's clear is that Bill has really lost it. Hillary better throw him in the closet and lock it tight, or she's finished.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Well, Bill is from Arkansas...what do you expect?

In all seriousness, I'm not sure exactly what's going on with the Clinton's (let's be honest, it's not just Hillary running here) primary campaign. They are fighting pretty dirty, which seems like a mistake since Obama is a nice guy...and more importantly, he comes across as a nice guy to most of the voters. If/when Clinton wins the primary, I have no doubt that the dirty fighting will continue in the general election...but that's not what's going to hurt her. Let's face it, in a general election, most people are easily convinced that "the other guy" deserved all the nasty barbs flung his way. But while voters might ignore, or even approve of, Clinton taking McCain or Romney or whoever the pieces, what they're going to remember is the same attack machine being targeted at Obama...who has done nothing more than try to bring a positive message to a political process that has been missing one for a long time.

In other words, while the Clinton campaign machine will work well against the Republicans, using it against Obama might be a mistake. There is no Republican candidate who seems like anything but Dubya part II, nasty campaigning from their side of the aisle is pretty much a guarantee no matter who wins. But Obama was different, in a way that resonated with many voters. Attacking him the way the Clintons are, especially with the crypto-racist stuff, is going to highlight all that much more how much Hillary is more of the same just with a different gender.

The funny thing is that Obama would be the perfect general election candidate for this very reason, the typical dirty campaigning from the Republicans would backfire even more so in their case than in Hillary's case. I'm a Democrat and even I found Kerry to be a bit of a jackass...but Obama has the kind of nice guy approach that really might work in the general election. It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

I think what has been missing in this discourse is what you're touching on here, the fact that they are smearing a positive guy who is trying to build a Democratic majority in this country. What about 2012 or 2016? The party has a great asset in Obama, it just so happens he is fighting against the leaders of the party for the past 16 years. The Clintons are putting their own self interest above that of the future of their party and presumably (from a Democrat's point of view) the future of the country. They want nothing more than to destroy the star candidate of the party for the sake of their campaign. I don't think I'm spinning this as an Obama supporter, at least not too much. . . even Clinton supporters should note that an 'experienced' Obama in 4-8 years would be a threat.

 

[nageov3t]

I think what has been missing in this discourse is what you're touching on here, the fact that they are smearing a positive guy

I like to think of the primaries as a gauntlet... only the strongest survive.

I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

 

[Pabster]

Stepping away from the politics, you've got to give Obama his due. Prior to his speech at the Dem Convention in '04, nobody knew who the guy was. And for him to waltz in and wage such an effective campaign against the Clinton Machine is truly a monumental feat in and of itself. He has given Team Clinton all they can handle.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

Where has Obama played the "victim" card? :roll:

The only "victim" cards I've seen are from Team Clinton. She's played every one possible at various times.

I agree that the hits from Team Clinton are great practice for the general election. :laugh:

 

[aidanjm]

It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

let me guess, helping her party or country would involve politely stepping aside for Obama?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

Where has Obama played the "victim" card? :roll:

The only "victim" cards I've seen are from Team Clinton. She's played every one possible at various times.

I agree that the hits from Team Clinton are great practice for the general election. :laugh:

it's that whole "omg, teh clintons are attacking meeee. whaaa" thing.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: loki8481

I think what has been missing in this discourse is what you're touching on here, the fact that they are smearing a positive guy

I like to think of the primaries as a gauntlet... only the strongest survive.

I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

There is no way the Republicans could get away with the kind of racial comments being made by Bill right now.

If a Republican made that Jesse Jackson comment the media would spend a day asking if it was a 'racial attack.'

Imagine a Republican suggesting that Obama is only getting black votes because he is black, again the media would be all over it as some type of racist remark.

 

[Farang]

Originally posted by: loki8481

I think what has been missing in this discourse is what you're touching on here, the fact that they are smearing a positive guy

I like to think of the primaries as a gauntlet... only the strongest survive.

I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

I'm not saying it isn't within their right to attack Obama. What I'm saying is Obamas don't grow on trees and the Democratic party is lucky to have him, so attack him on being inexperienced and on naive foreign policy or whatever but don't outright lie to smear the man ("fairy tale" Iraq war stance, for instance).

 

[SViscusi]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

let me guess, helping her party or country would involve politely stepping aside for Obama?

How about just running a clean campaign. No disenfranchising voters, no southern strategy, no robo calls, no lying campaign fliers, none of that rovian bs that we democrats have fought against for the past 8 years. How about acting like an adult?

There is absolutely no point in just changing parties if the tactics are going to be the same.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: loki8481

I think what has been missing in this discourse is what you're touching on here, the fact that they are smearing a positive guy

I like to think of the primaries as a gauntlet... only the strongest survive.

I'm a bit apathetic towards the whole Hill v Obama thing (not a democrat, can't vote in the NJ primaries, like 'em both, etc). but Obama playing the victim boggles me a bit. it's not like the republican candidate is going to treat him with kid gloves... there's nothing Hillary can throw against him that he shouldn't be preparing to face in the general election.

There is no way the Republicans could get away with the kind of racial comments being made by Bill right now.

If a Republican made that Jesse Jackson comment the media would spend a day asking if it was a 'racial attack.'

Imagine a Republican suggesting that Obama is only getting black votes because he is black, again the media would be all over it as some type of racist remark.

Bill Clinton hasn't made any racial comments, so it seems like a moot point

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: loki8481
Bill Clinton hasn't made any racial comments, so it seems like a moot point

Of course he hasn't :roll:

I'm starting to think you're on the Clinton payroll, loki.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: SViscusi

Originally posted by: aidanjm

It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

let me guess, helping her party or country would involve politely stepping aside for Obama?

How about just running a clean campaign. No disenfranchising voters, no southern strategy, no robo calls, no lying campaign fliers, none of that rovian bs that we democrats have fought against for the past 8 years. How about acting like an adult?

There is absolutely no point in just changing parties if the tactics are going to be the same.

how is Obama's campaign any "cleaner" than Clinton's? it appears to me Obama's supporters have engaged in equally questionable behavior, however for some reason they maintain a "holier than thou" attitude.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: loki8481
Bill Clinton hasn't made any racial comments, so it seems like a moot point

Of course he hasn't :roll:

I'm starting to think you're on the Clinton payroll, loki.

the only "racial comments" I've seen have been what people chose to read into his words and how they distort them.

 

[SViscusi]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: SViscusi

Originally posted by: aidanjm

It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

let me guess, helping her party or country would involve politely stepping aside for Obama?

How about just running a clean campaign. No disenfranchising voters, no southern strategy, no robo calls, no lying campaign fliers, none of that rovian bs that we democrats have fought against for the past 8 years. How about acting like an adult?

There is absolutely no point in just changing parties if the tactics are going to be the same.

how is Obama's campaign any "cleaner" than Clinton's? it appears to me Obama's supporters have engaged in equally questionable behavior, however for some reason they maintain a "holier than thou" attitude.

Let's see Obama's campaign hasn't made any robo calls, they also havn't filed any lawsuits to get voting places closed after they had agreed to them. They haven't threatened to primary any elected official who didn't support them, they didn't try and close doors early in Nevada, there were no Obama only tables in Nevada, they've never dismissed the results of a state because they got smoked by 28%, they've never misrepresented anyones record on the issue of choice. They haven't done any of those things, and neither has Edwards, only Clinton.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: SViscusi

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: SViscusi

Originally posted by: aidanjm

It's too bad Clinton is more interested in being president than in helping her party, or the country.

let me guess, helping her party or country would involve politely stepping aside for Obama?

How about just running a clean campaign. No disenfranchising voters, no southern strategy, no robo calls, no lying campaign fliers, none of that rovian bs that we democrats have fought against for the past 8 years. How about acting like an adult?

There is absolutely no point in just changing parties if the tactics are going to be the same.

how is Obama's campaign any "cleaner" than Clinton's? it appears to me Obama's supporters have engaged in equally questionable behavior, however for some reason they maintain a "holier than thou" attitude.

Let's see Obama's campaign hasn't made any robo calls, they also havn't filed any lawsuits to get voting places closed after they had agreed to them. They haven't threatened to primary any elected official who didn't support them, they didn't try and close doors early in Nevada, there were no Obama only tables in Nevada, they've never dismissed the results of a state because they got smoked by 28%, they've never misrepresented anyones record on the issue of choice. They haven't done any of those things, and neither has Edwards, only Clinton.

you really need to expand on these points, provide plenty of detail and links, and explain exactly what was so ethically questionable in each case. it seems like a lot of hot air to me.

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Oh boy, lets all jump on the Obama Band Wagon now :roll:

I honestly hope you Obama supporters are choosing from the lesser of two evils and not because you really think he's the golden candidate.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: loki8481
the only "racial comments" I've seen have been what people chose to read into his words and how they distort them.

That's because the words they are speaking, the connotations, are precise. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together.