Pre Mortem
From the Seattle Times comes a sort of autopsy of the sinking and possibly soon dead Clinton campaign. It is brutal, it is ugly and if Clinton reads it, the waterworks should come on at full force. Because it is all true.
Hillary and Bill Clinton will never be able to pull a Sally Fields and announce that people like them. Because people don't.
And they are not all super fans of the Clintons.
Some are labor leaders still angry that Bill Clinton championed the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his centrist agenda.
Some are social activists who lobbied unsuccessfully to get him to veto welfare reform legislation, a talking point for his 1996 re-election campaign.
Some served in Congress when the Clintons dismissed their advice on health care reform in 1993. Some called her a bully at the time.
Some are DNC members who saw the party committee weakened under the Clintons and watched President Bush use the White House to build up the Republican National Committee.
Some are senators who had to defend Clinton for lying to the country about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
Some are allies of former Vice President Al Gore who still believe the Lewinsky scandal cost him the presidency in 2000.
Some are House members (or former House members) who still blame Clinton for Republicans seizing control of the House in 1994.
Some are donors who paid for the Clintons' campaigns and his presidential library.
Some are folks who owe the Clintons a favor but still feel betrayed or taken for granted. Could that be why Bill Richardson, a former U.N. secretary and energy secretary in the Clinton administration, refused to endorse her even after an angry call from the former president? "What," Bill Clinton reportedly asked Richardson, "isn't two Cabinet posts enough?"
And some just want something new. They appreciate the fact that Clinton was a successful president and his wife was an able partner, but they never loved the couple as much as they feared them.
As the writer of the piece, Ron Fournier, points out, never, ever count the Clintons out. But by the same token, you really shouldn't underestimate their talent for self destructiveness. But for that talent, Bill Clinton might have actually left a positive legacy behind him. And maybe Hillary would not be in the fight of her political life.
By syn, February 13, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
If so many Democrat dislike Hillary wouldn’t it be better for McCain if she first defeats Obama in the primaries?
By Purple Avenger, February 13, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
She’s toast. They’ll dump her in a heartbeat if it looks like Obama has a chance.
By Sam Wah, February 13, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
What? Exactly why and how was it that those senators "had" to defend Clinton. Was it an "offer they couldn’t refuse", or did they take his word for it that he "didn’t have sex with that woman"?
By Mockinbird, February 13, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
syn does have a point there. However, If Obama gets their nomination, He’ll have to explain details of his policies. Since he’s an empty suit, McCain should be able to win the general election. I haven’t liked McCains previous views-votes, but this voter will go with the lesser of two evils. Additionally, I think McCain is changing to the right as time goes by.
By feeblemind, February 13, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
HRC is not out of it yet. Who knows what kind of markers the Clintons can call in on the superdelegates? The Clintons don’t quit. I still think this will go all the way to the convention. A Democrat armageddon is in the cards.
By DavidL, February 13, 2008 @ 4:54 pm
We need to bring back a MSM word from 2000, Gravitas.
By Quilly Mammoth, February 13, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
Lannie Davis said that if Obama is the Democrat Challenger that it will make McGovern’s run look like a win.
By Mockinbird, February 14, 2008 @ 3:09 pm
Lannie Davis eats his own product.