Slick Willy -- asset or baggage?

[Anuba]

I watched a few clips of Bill Clinton speaking at a rally in Florida yesterday, and he was on fire. It was an extremely well delivered and informative speech, and he did what nobody else has done so far and explained the bailout in terms that even Joe Sixpack could understand.

Earlier this year, during the primaries, there was sort of a consensus that Clinton was a problem -- a loose cannon who embarrassed Hillary on a frequent basis, a bad 90's flashback who by association made her look like an echo of the past.

Now that all the focus has shifted to the economy, it looked like people were suddenly pretty damn interested in what he had to say. Do you think that he's becoming a valuable asset to the Obama campaign again, as a symbol of the glory days when the economy was strong, or is he still better off in a museum?

[és:]

I think he could be a big asset to the Obama campaign, actually. He's inspirational when he wants to be and that could win a lot of votes.

[leekohler]

Of course he would be an asset. He needs to be doing more of this. It disgusts me that neither Bill nor Hillary have been fighting harder. It's clear to me from their behavior that a lot of us were right about the Clintons all along.

[Ugg]

Now that Hilary isn't in the race, I think he's an asset to Obama. Bill is a powerful orator and one who is able to cut through political bs and as you say, make things understandable.

[iShater]

A major asset. Too bad he had to campaign for Hilary and thus is somewhat tainted when having to speak for Obama.

Aaaah, the good old days. :p

[atszyman]

Of course he would be an asset. He needs to be doing more of this. It disgusts me that neither Bill nor Hillary have been fighting harder. It's clear to me from their behavior that a lot of us were right about the Clintons all along.

To be fair, I think the Clintons have been doing a fair bit of campaigning for Obama, however they are doing most of it (rightly so) in swing states and the national media doesn't seem to bother with their agendas or reporting on what they're doing since their names aren't on the ticket for Election day.

Neither you, nor I live in a swing state and thus tend to be insulated a bit more from the political news of what's going on in the swing states.

Could they be doing more, maybe, but how much are the other primary candidates doing? The Clintons have already surpassed everything done by most of the other primary opponents on both sides and seem to still be campaigning hard for Obama.

Of course had she dropped out of the primaries earlier, no one would be expecting this much out of them so in a way it's their own fault that we expect so much of them.

[leekohler]

To be fair, I think the Clintons have been doing a fair bit of campaigning for Obama, however they are doing most of it (rightly so) in swing states and the national media doesn't seem to bother with their agendas or reporting on what they're doing since their names aren't on the ticket for Election day.

Neither you, nor I live in a swing state and thus tend to be insulated a bit more from the political news of what's going on in the swing states.

Could they be doing more, maybe, but how much are the other primary candidates doing? The Clintons have already surpassed everything done by most of the other primary opponents on both sides and seem to still be campaigning hard for Obama.

Of course had she dropped out of the primaries earlier, no one would be expecting this much out of them so in a way it's their own fault that we expect so much of them.

Hmm...yeah, I haven't heard a peep since the convention. Perhaps you're right.

[Anuba]

To be fair, I think the Clintons have been doing a fair bit of campaigning for Obama, however they are doing most of it (rightly so) in swing states and the national media doesn't seem to bother with their agendas or reporting on what they're doing since their names aren't on the ticket for Election day.

Neither you, nor I live in a swing state and thus tend to be insulated a bit more from the political news of what's going on in the swing states.

Could they be doing more, maybe, but how much are the other primary candidates doing? The Clintons have already surpassed everything done by most of the other primary opponents on both sides and seem to still be campaigning hard for Obama.

Of course had she dropped out of the primaries earlier, no one would be expecting this much out of them so in a way it's their own fault that we expect so much of them.
Maybe it's better for the campaign right now if Hillary takes the back seat and lets Bill handle most of the campaigning? I think it's come to a point where the staunchest Hillary supporters (who originally said they wouldn't vote for Obama out of pure spite) have started to get with the program and I don't think it's a good time to remind them of what they could've had.

The reason I asked is that I'm not American so I don't know what the feelings are about the Clintons. Over here in Europe, pretty much everyone loved the guy and shrugged off the whole Lewinsky thing. But a lot of Americans seem to want to throw up whenever his name is mentioned. Some of them are democrats, too. As for the republicans, I don't know if they hate him because they actually think that 1993-2000 were god awful years of misery, or because he was so good it annoys the hell out of them.

[atszyman]

Hmm...yeah, I haven't heard a peep since the convention. Perhaps you're right.

I know that she went out and did some campaigning shortly after Palin was announced, and he has been making the rounds, even saw him on the Daily Show last week.

I just think their campaigning tends to hit more local news since the national media is more focused on the candidates themselves.

[balamw]

It was an extremely well delivered and informative speech, and he did what nobody else has done so far and explained the bailout in terms that even Joe Sixpack could understand.


Have you heard/read Obama's speech from Reno on Tuesday? I thought it achieved the same goal you mention above, though it did not get any press coverage that I saw. (Some of the themes were repeated in his address to the Senate, but it was much briefer). For example, I finally understood why raising the FDIC limit mattered.

http://speeches.demconwatchblog.com/2008/09/barack-obamas-speech-in-reno-nv.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/01/the-great-communicator_n_130760.html

B

[beatzfreak]

Maybe it's better for the campaign right now if Hillary takes the back seat and lets Bill handle most of the campaigning? I think it's come to a point where the staunchest Hillary supporters (who originally said they wouldn't vote for Obama out of pure spite) have started to get with the program and I don't think it's a good time to remind them of what they could've had.

You've hit the nail on the head with this observation. Also, she is my senator and with so much at stake I would rather have her in the senate right now doing what I elected her to do.

The reason I asked is that I'm not American so I don't know what the feelings are about the Clintons. Over here in Europe, pretty much everyone loved the guy and shrugged off the whole Lewinsky thing. But a lot of Americans seem to want to throw up whenever his name is mentioned. Some of them are democrats, too. As for the republicans, I don't know if they hate him because they actually think that 1993-2000 were god awful years of misery, or because he was so good it annoys the hell out of them.

With the economic situation, Bill is the perfect person to be out there for Obama. He reminds people of a time when things were good, and he's very good at explaining economics in layman terms. I can't speak for Republicans, but he kind of whimped out on a few key issues when he was in office. The Lewinsky thing was a bit embarrassing, but more importantly lead to him being held hostage for the sake of his wife's campaign. It left a bad taste in the mouth of some of his supporters. When you see him in person, though, due to his charisma, that bad taste goes right out the window.

[mactastic]

It left a bad taste in the mouth of some of his supporters.
You're not kidding! :D

[solvs]

He needs to be doing more of this.

He is. As is Hillary. As I posted in another thread, she actually went off because someone tried to put her in some even with Palin a few weeks ago. She bailed out of it when she found out Palin was invited as a fellow speaker. And this was before the bad interviews with Couric and Gibson. As noted, the media isn't covering it much for some reason. Bill has been all over the place trying to defend himself and Obama. Media just isn't covering it. Too much of a controversy to make it seem like it's still an issue/not really as interesting as one of the candidates themselves saying or doing something stupid, as McCain and Palin have been.

[BoyBach]

Clintons to start campaigning for Obama

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, already ahead in the polls, was expected to get a further boost Sunday when former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, make a joint campaign appearances on his behalf.

The nation's best known and most powerful Democrats for nearly two decades will be on the road for Obama, who vanquished Hillary Clinton last spring in a bitter primary contest. The Clintons apparently have put that behind them and will stump for Obama's election.

The Clintons are to appear with Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, at a rally Sunday in the working-class town of Scranton, Pennsylvania. The location is meaningful because Biden was born in Scranton and lived there for several years as a child, while Hillary Clinton's father grew up in the town and is buried there. The former first couple later will follow separate itineraries, also campaigning for House and Senate candidates.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/race-for-whitehouse/clintons-to-start-campaigning-for-obama-958889.html

[Anuba]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/race-for-whitehouse/clintons-to-start-campaigning-for-obama-958889.html
Uh-oh, here comes the final killing blow... I'm almost starting to feel sorry for McCain.

[Abstract]

Hillary now realizes that she won't be VP, right?

It's good that they're doing this for party support.


PS: I disagree with those who say Hilary shouldn't be campaigning right now, and that it should be mostly left to Bill.

Hillary should come out in order to be a huge contrast to Palin, who is just incompetent. The first female American Vice President shouldn't be Palin. It's one thing for women to vote for "girl power", but Palin isn't the way to go. She's an embarrassment, and Hilary can be useful in showing people this.

[Anuba]

Hillary now realizes that she won't be VP, right?

It's good that they're doing this for party support.


PS: I disagree with those who say Hilary shouldn't be campaigning right now, and that it should be mostly left to Bill.

Hillary should come out in order to be a huge contrast to Palin, who is just incompetent. Once people hear Hilary speak again in a competent manner, Palin is just going to look even worse.
It's all about timing. I think it was wise to put Hillary on ice for a while, but now is the perfect time to roll her out... now they can use her as a symbol of unity in crisis AND a stark contrast to Palin. They can't cry sexism, which allows Hillary to go for the throat.

The Clintons are good for the experience angle as well. You'd be hard pressed to find two people more experienced than the Clintons, and not only did Obama beat the Clintons, they're now campaigning for him as well.

[Thomas Veil]

It's all about timing. I think it was wise to put Hillary on ice for a while, but now is the perfect time to roll her out... now they can use her as a symbol of unity in crisis AND a stark contrast to Palin. They can't cry sexism, which allows Hillary to go for the throat.Good point. And overall, Obama could use this help, in spite of the fact that he's ahead. Now is not the time to coast on a lead; now is the time to pour it on.

[mactastic]

The former first couple later will follow separate itineraries, also campaigning for House and Senate candidates.
This is the important part. It's looking more and more like Obama doesn't really need much more help from the Democratic establishment to win the POTUS seat.

What will really help him; however, is to have broad Democratic majorities in Congress.

[CalBoy]

What will really help him; however, is to have broad Democratic majorities in Congress.

It looks increasingly likely that the Democrats will get to the magic number of 60 senators, which will let Obama really get things done, and get them done without Republican-desired loopholes and corporate welfare.

[Anuba]

It's all about timing. I think it was wise to put Hillary on ice for a while, but now is the perfect time to roll her out... now they can use her as a symbol of unity in crisis AND a stark contrast to Palin. They can't cry sexism, which allows Hillary to go for the throat.
Actually... scratch that, I'm still on the fence about Hillary.

IMO, both the Clintons are better speakers than Obama, but Bill isn't a problem because he's had his 8 years. But Hillary... I dunno, I just watched a few of her speeches, including some recent ones at small venues, and... she's just too damn good. There seems to be an awful lot of these "McCain 2008 -- Hillary 2012"-people out there. Hillary's involvement could backfire. Maybe the campaign should just sit still in the boat at this point.

[mactastic]

It looks increasingly likely that the Democrats will get to the magic number of 60 senators, which will let Obama really get things done, and get them done without Republican-desired loopholes and corporate welfare.
Sure, if by "increasingly" you mean "moved from near zero to an outside chance if everything continues to break their way over the next 4 weeks". ;)

[CalBoy]

Sure, if by "increasingly" you mean "moved from near zero to an outside chance if everything continues to break their way over the next 4 weeks". ;)

It's not as far off as you think.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has been tracking the Senate races, and the Democrats are leading in most races. Current projects put them at 59-41. One seat going the Dems way is not "an outside chance." ;)

[rdowns]

It's not as far off as you think.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has been tracking the Senate races, and the Democrats are leading in most races. Current projects put them at 59-41. One seat going the Dems way is not "an outside chance." ;)

I expect Leiberman to become a Republican after election day.

[mactastic]

It's not as far off as you think.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has been tracking the Senate races, and the Democrats are leading in most races. Current projects put them at 59-41. One seat going the Dems way is not "an outside chance." ;)You'll need 61 seats to counter the Lieberman effect.

And you're right, the chances have improved. But it's still more likely than not that the Democrats will not quite get there. But then, I would have said the same thing about picking up a majority in the Senate at this time two years ago.

[CalBoy]

I expect Leiberman to become a Republican after election day.
There's a good chance of that, but even if he does, he might not always vote against cloture like other Republicans would, especially if it's a major bill that seeks to regulate banks that got bailout money (I expect one or two other Republicans would also not vote against cloture in that event).
But it's still more likely than not that the Democrats will not quite get there.

It will probably end up being a 59-41 Senate, and then later on 58-42 with Leiberman's defection, but it still makes filibusters extremely difficult when you have to count on all but 1 of your senators voting with the party. Not good odds at all (especially when one of them would be a former Democrat).

[mactastic]

It will probably end up being a 59-41 Senate, and then later on 58-42 with Leiberman's defection, but it still makes filibusters extremely difficult when you have to count on all but 1 of your senators voting with the party. Not good odds at all (especially when one of them would be a former Democrat).
Republicans tend to vote as a bloc following the party line much more readily than the Democrats do.

Not disagreeing with you, just sayin'... I'm sure Harry Reid wishes he had the same level of party unity that the GOP was able to muster when needed.

[jplan2008]

There's a good chance of that, but even if he does, he might not always vote against cloture like other Republicans would, especially if it's a major bill that seeks to regulate banks that got bailout money (I expect one or two other Republicans would also not vote against cloture in that event).


It will probably end up being a 59-41 Senate, and then later on 58-42 with Leiberman's defection, but it still makes filibusters extremely difficult when you have to count on all but 1 of your senators voting with the party. Not good odds at all (especially when one of them would be a former Democrat).

I don't think he's going to "defect," he's going to be kicked out. He gets to be chair of a committee now, I think they're going to take it away if they have at least 55 or 56 without him.

I think it will be hard politically for the Republicans to filibuster everything, but I'm worried about 2010 -- Obama and the Democrats can't turn around a major recession and 28 years of failed economic policies (with an eight-year improvement but not turnaround) in less than two years. There's also a problem with the "blue dog" Democrats who think balancing the budget is the most important -- the only way to get out of the financial mess is by upping government spending overall, then move back to balanced budgets and surpluses.

[CalBoy]

Republicans tend to vote as a bloc following the party line much more readily than the Democrats do.

Not disagreeing with you, just sayin'... I'm sure Harry Reid wishes he had the same level of party unity that the GOP was able to muster when needed.

Republican party unity is definitely quite strong (I'd say too much), but the Republicans will have to play a very tight game in the Senate if they want to keep it in a continuous state of filibuster. Eventually they'll fail, or, worse they'll be accused of shutting down business in Washington à la Daschle's Senate Graveyard during the 03-05 session.
I don't think he's going to "defect," he's going to be kicked out. He gets to be chair of a committee now, I think they're going to take it away if they have at least 55 or 56 without him.

Well naturally they'll remove him from positions of power, but that won't stop him from voting against cloture and letting the Republicans stall all business on Capitol Hill.

I think it will be hard politically for the Republicans to filibuster everything,
Never doubt the power of an entrenched and wounded party in a body with as few rules as the Senate. ;)

but I'm worried about 2010

The economy will likely bottom out by late next year, and from there make a very slow and gradual recovery, but as long as the situation is improving, the Democrats will be able to show that they are effective on the economic front and retain control of Congress.

There are also more Republican Senate seats up for reelection than Democratic ones in 2010, so that gives an edge to the Democrats (if nothing else).

[Thomas Veil]

Bill, Hillary and Joe Biden stumping in Scranton, Pennsylvania today (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/12/campaign.wrap/index.html):

The New York senator blasted the Republicans as she made her case for Obama and Biden.

"To John McCain and George Bush, the middle class isn't fundamental; it's ornamental. They don't understand that we are at the core of whether this country goes up or down," she said.

"Sending the Republicans to solve this economic crisis is like sending the bull to clean up the china closet. They broke it and we're not buying it anymore," she said. "Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be leaders who will lead us out of this economic crisis."

Biden rallied the crowd as he pounded the podium and called for voters to "get up."

"I have never seen as many Americans knocked down as I have in the last past eight years. It's time to ... get up," he said. "So get up Pennsylvania, get up Scranton, get up deliver and this election for Barack Obama."I love that line about the middle class not being fundamental, but ornamental. :D

And get this -- this is what McCain told a pep rally today:

"After I whip his you-know-what in this debate, we're going to be going out 24/7"Oh, please! :rolleyes: McCain couldn't find his own ass if you gave him a mirror and a flashlight.

[mactastic]

There's also a problem with the "blue dog" Democrats who think balancing the budget is the most important -- the only way to get out of the financial mess is by upping government spending overall, then move back to balanced budgets and surpluses.
Which is why McCain's Deep Thought about a spending freeze right now is the absolute worst medicine for the economy possible.

What Republicans don't get is that NOW is the time for deficit spending and tax reductions; not when the economy is roaring along. That's when you shore up the surpluses and prepare for the rainy day. When that time comes, as in now, you spend to keep things moving. The GOP has left us bankrupt when we need it most.

There are also more Republican Senate seats up for reelection than Democratic ones in 2010, so that gives an edge to the Democrats (if nothing else).
The Senate map for 2010 is indeed more favorable to Democrats than to Republicans.

[jplan2008]

What Republicans don't get is that NOW is the time for deficit spending and tax reductions; not when the economy is roaring along. That's when you shore up the surpluses and prepare for the rainy day. When that time comes, as in now, you spend to keep things moving. The GOP has left us bankrupt when we need it most.


There's a great op-ed piece in the NY Times about all the problems the Republican party has caused over the past decades -- economy, foreign policy, etc, and about the idea of voting for someone because he's someone you'd like to have a beer with:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/opinion/11herbert.html

"...For the nitwits who vote for the man or woman they’d most like to have over for dinner, or hang out at a barbecue with, I suggest you take a look at how well your 401(k) is doing, or how easy it will be to meet the mortgage this month, or whether the college fund you’ve been trying to build for your kids is as robust as you’d like it to be.

Voters in the George W. Bush era gave the Republican Party nearly complete control of the federal government. Now the financial markets are in turmoil, top government and corporate leaders are on the verge of panic and scholars are dusting off treatises that analyzed the causes of the Great Depression.

Mr. Bush was never viewed as a policy or intellectual heavyweight. But he seemed like a nicer guy to a lot of voters than Al Gore...."

[solvs]

For those thinking the Clintons aren't trying hard enough:

Clintons campaigning for Obama-Biden in Pa. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081012/ap_on_el_pr/clintons_obama)
Hillary: America Will Rise Again "From The Ashes Of The Bushes" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/12/hillary-america-can-rise_n_134019.html)
Clinton's rejoinder: Jobs, baby, jobs (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081013/ap_on_el_pr/obama_clintons)
Obama, Clinton to rally outside Amway Arena on Monday (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/orl-a3blogwatch1808oct18,0,4530265.story)

And sorry to disappoint stevento, but:

Sen. Clinton says 2nd White House run is unlikely (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081014/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_s_future)

And in a bit of, I don't know, irony I think:

McCain talks economy with Hillary (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14599.html)