Why can't Clintonites stay on message for Obama?
Former President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama wave to the crowd during a campaign event at the Waldorf Astoria, Monday, June 4, 2012, in New York.
/ AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster"In 2010, President Clinton At Cuyahoga Community College Said If Obama And Democrats Haven't Worked Out In Two Years, 'You Can Vote Us All Out Then,'" read a Thursday morning blast from the Republican National Committee (RNC).
The email goes on to quote Clinton's 2010 remarks: "Democrats are saying something like this: 'Look, we found a big hole that we did not dig. And we didn't get out of it in 21 months but at least we quit digging. So, don't go back in reverse, give us two more years. If it doesn't work, you have another election in just two years. You can vote us all out then. But for goodness sakes, we quit digging don't bring back the shovel brigade.'"
Voters didn't entirely grant Clinton his wish. Republicans re-took the in the House of Representatives in 2010, and Ohio Rep. John Boehner became Speaker of the House in January 2011. Still, Clinton's words are now providing fodder for Republicans in the upcoming election.
It's hardly the first time Clinton's words have come back to haunt Mr. Obama: This month alone, the former president has taken heat for defending Bain Capital, testifying to Mitt Romney's "sterling" business career, and suggesting he favored extending the Bush-era tax cuts.
He is not the only Democrat giving the president headaches. Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell - another Clintonite - recently called the Obama campaign's ads attacking Bain "very disappointing." And just this week, Democratic strategists Stan Greenberg and James Carville, both former Clinton advisers, released a memo warning of "an impossible headwind this November if we do not move to a new narrative."
A number of theories have been floated with regard to the Clinton camp's apparent inability to stay on message for the president, from an inability to understand the Twitter-era news cycle, to a devious attempt to promote Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential prospects. Hillary Clinton, of course, has repeatedly denied plans for another presidential run.
According to Stu Rothenberg, the editor and publisher of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report, the calculus is probably not part of some nefarious scheme.
"I don't think this is some grand conspiracy where they all sat down and thought, 'How can we stick it to Obama?'" he said. "We're talking about people who are not Obama partisans and frankly don't see their role at the moment as primarily defending the president. That doesn't meant they won't vote for Obama and that doesn't mean they don't prefer Obama -- it just means they're not invested in him the way Obama insiders are."
"I think they do support the president," he added. "It's just that there's enough distance between them and the White House, and since they're not part of the inner circle they don't see themselves that way."
Some of that distance may well come from residual tensions left over from the bitterly divisive 2008 Democratic primary contest.
"I've always felt in politics that once divisions develop they are very hard to heal and the truth is that in Obama's difficulties, some of Hillary Clinton's supporters may find vindication," said political analyst Larry Sabato, of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "You can bury the hatchet, but the people who buried it remember where it is."
"Let's not forget this is about the future too," he added. "Hillary Clinton may run for president in 2016 and if so Bill Clinton wants to position her in the best possible way. That may call for some distance between her and Obama. And these comments may come in very handy one day."
Clintonites, of course, aren't the only political animals out there saying negative things about candidates in their own party, and Rendell is also a political commentator for MSNBC. Ostensibly, that's part of his job.
Rothenberg points out that Jeb Bush, brother of former President George W. Bush and son of former President George H. W. Bush, not to mention a Romney supporter, has also taken some heat in recent days for making controversial comments about the state of the Republican party.
"I think everybody wants attention. They want to sound smart; they want to be cited; they want to be noticed; they want to be players," said Rothenberg. "One way you can actually do that is by telling the truth, because in politics there's so much sheer folly and spin."
"If you just saw yourself as a messenger for the party" you wouldn't criticize one of your own, he added, but people like Bush and Clinton "have some distance."
Jamal Simmons, a Democratic political analyst and former Clinton administration member, notes that Clinton, for all of his famed political instinct, is no longer playing the national political game.
"President Clinton is sitting in a different place. He is a global leader with a base in the U.S. President Obama is a national leader who has to get re-elected," Simmons said. "As a former president, Clinton kind of has a right to say what he thinks."
Not that Simmons necessarily thinks the president's team should listen to the peanut gallery.
"I think the president's team should be cautious about listening too much to people who aren't aware of their entire game plan," he said. "The thing I know about campaigns is that when you're inside of them you have an objective you have to reach by November of this year. You have a sense of what you have to do."
"There are only so many things you can say and you can do at once and this period is about defining Mitt Romney for the American people," he added.
Popular in Politics
- Obama forgets to salute while boarding Marine One Play Video
- Petraeus biographer regrets affair
- The Ted Cruz conundrum
- IRS' Lerner was asked to resign, refused: GOP Sen. 194 Comments
- As summer approaches, sequestration threatens holiday fun
- Obama prom pictures surface 131 Comments
- GOP Rep.: Obama elected because of Reagan's immigration reforms
- Is President Obama ending the war on terror? 319 Comments
http://galationpress.blogspot.com/2012/03/anyone-who-has-studied-this-issue.html
I think that Barrack is a great guy, but he lacks leadership, experience and bipartisanship. As the persident, He should be the won making the first moves towards talking with the republicans. Bill Clinton moved towards the to win re election granted he cheated, but most men do anyways, so i dont see why people hate him as much. He did a good job politically, economically. Hillary Clinton won the populous vote. By all rights, she had won the party's nomination. But Barrack go it. Now 4 years later, she worked her butt off and she almost 64, 65. Remember, an upstart like obama stopped hillary. She faced sexism from her own part. Us clinton dems got bashed on by both obama and mccain supporters. She is experienced, bright, smart, she knows how to negotiate, and its a much more powerful message to have a woman president then obama. I think that the party made a mistake, if anything obama should have been hillarys vp, and learned the ins and out of running. obama in 2020 could still run and the economy would be back to how its suppose to be and he wouldnt have so much problems. He cannot handle them, neither can his cabinet or team. thats why hillary is leaving. She knows if shes stays her political future gets flushed.
If Obama wins, hillary runs in 2016- DOESNT HELP HER, CAUSE SHES MORE POPULAR
If Obama Looses, and Hillarys her VP - RUINS HER 2016 BID IF SHE DOES RUN
If Obama looses, Hillary stays out, -- 2016 IN THE BAG
any one of those 3 could play out. so far its the last one
Let's see 2 needless wars, no WMD, Millions murdered and maimed, countless families destroyed and the destruction of the world economy so bad that John McCain suspended his campaign.
As an American I know that today the biggest movement in the states stems from The Plot to Overthrow by Mohammad Goldstein this man bluntly tells the world who a Jew IS and what a Muslim really IS; Obama senators, and congressmen AND BUSH all have copies, and you can get it for nuttin on the net it will blow your political mind about Americas role and is laced with "inside" truth about Washington.
Let's see 2 needless wars, no WMD, Millions murdered and maimed, countless families destroyed and the destruction of the world economy so bad that John McCain suspended his campaign.
As an American I know that today the biggest movement in the states stems from The Plot to Overthrow by Mohammad Goldstein this man bluntly tells the world who a Jew IS and what a Muslim really IS; Obama senators, and congressmen AND BUSH all have copies, and you can get it for nuttin on the net it will blow your political mind about Americas role and is laced with "inside" truth about Washington.
"Ooooh, I supported Hillary all along.....".
Yeah, right.
That aside, what's going on here is that the Democrats are destroying our nation morally and socially (other than greed: that's the subject of the Republicans), and not doing anything to help us economically (jobs), while the Republicans are destroying us economically. There are no good guys anymore; they're all rotten. Buddy Roemer was our last chance, but he got pushed out by the Republicans and abandoned by the Democrats. Why? Because he wanted to clean the money out of politics and bring our jobs back from overseas. Oh, but no no no! Almost every member of our Congress is a fat-cat investor, and "free trade" is what fattens their wallets.
In the end, I still support Obama (slightly) over Romney, but I'm not sure I've got the *umph* to drag myself out to the voting station this year and stand in a line for a barely lesser of two evils.