Democratic convention 2008 discussion thread

Hijacking here, but I wonder who you think would have been able to win the White House in 1992? Jerry Brown or Paul Tsongas, perhaps?

I swear this is what drives me insane about the Democratic Party. I’ll be the first to acknowledge that the Clinton years were not paradise, but I think they were best years of executive government in my lifetime. I can’t imagine being happier with a Republican in the White House from 1992 to 2000.

Republicans have this right: they respect their party leaders. But it’s sport among Democrats to tear down those that build the party. Jimmy Carter couldn’t show his face at a convention until recently, and now it’s Clinton’s turn, I guess.

It’s a little surreal watching all these white people enthusiastically support a guy named Barack Obama without skipping a beat.

I hope Bill Clinton falls in line tomorrow. He is the second best speaker at the convention and can really do some damage if he wants to.

Hillary was better than I thought. I usually can’t stand her speeches. She usually sounds like she is talking to a group of elementary school kids. Gleefully raising the pitch of her voice at the end of each sentence. Always coming away looking like that one pathetic high school teacher who is the only one enthusiastic about some lame school pride event. Causing students to wonder if teachers live on the same planet as they do. I feel the same way about Hillary after she finishes one of her speeches.

She toned it down for this speech, and sounded pretty good. I liked her shout out to Bill and the crowd’s reaction. Lets not forget that he was probably the best president we had since 1963.

I hope tomorrow is a red meat night. Bill and Biden would be two good people for it.

Did anyone notice that in the video, Bill was simply identified as “Hillary’s husband” when he was talking?

I think the Democratic party of 2008 is similar to a sports team that has lost too many close games. You start blaming a star player, the referee, the coach. That’s why we’re always bitching about Bill Clinton, HIllary Clinton, about Diebold, Karl Rove, insert name here.

We’re sick and tired of having lost the last 2 elections by one state. We’ve only had 3 Democratic presidents since 1968.

The good thing is that after this election I think you’ll finally see the Republicans bickering amongst themselves. The Republican party is in serious danger of becoming only a regional party of the South and square states. They’ve married themselves to the Christian conservatives and talk radio listeners obsessed with illegal immigration. The demographics are old and not getting any younger.

I laughed out loud at that. I also boggled a bit at the fact that part of the background music in that video montage was “Are You Gonna Go My Way?” Are you, indeed.

I’m reminded of the recent movie “There will be Blood”

I hope that’s exactly what happens tonight! Spill some Republican Blood, because they won’t waste a D.C. second in spilling the dems blood at their convention.

Eight decent years doesn’t get you a free pass for life. I’m glad Clinton won the White House in '92, but it’s time for he and his wife to let go of the baton already. In 2000 and 2004 I still saw him as the rock star of the Democratic party because he was the kick-ass ex-president-- *our * kick-ass ex-president. But this year I saw Bill (and Hillary) not as an honorable statesman who will do whatever’s best for this country; I saw him (and her) as a backbiting, conniving asshole who would do whatever he (or she) could to once again regain control of the party, to the point of tearing the party in two.

Exactly. She walked a very fine line - stating her platform, but spinning it into reasons to vote for Obama. And nailed it.

Every time they cut to a shot of Michelle Obama, I pictured a thought balloon coming out of her head…“don’t roll your eyes. smile & clap…don’t roll your eyes…”

Actually, 2 (not counting Johnson, who left office in 1969). And Carter was elected to one term, by a slim margin, in the post-Watergate purge.

Bills nose is beginning to look like a W.C, Fields nose. Does he drink a little?

I’ve noticed that for quite some time now. To my knowledge, it’s just the shape of his nose, but he’s just ready to do a great imitation, isn’t he?

ETA: A lot of people’s noses (and ears) do grow as they get older.

Bill Clinton has rosacea, as did W.C. Fields.

What a weird accusation. He has rosacea (as did W.C. Fields). Sure, alcohol can trigger “flushing” symptoms, but so can coffee, tea and spicy foods.

But it’s true - if you catch him at a certain angle, his nose looks just like W.C. Fields!

It all depends on what your definition of “nose” is.

Note it was a question. Not an accusation.

And apply exactly that reasoning to Hillary’s primary campaign and its wake. Did she do anything to repair (not just mitigate) the rifts she herself caused?

I just re-read her speech from last night. Her backing of Obama is tepid, at best, always cast in the light of “Here’s what I did, and Obama will do the same”. Her direct praise of Obama is non-existent – the closest she came was to say that he understands things: workers vs. energy speculators, new energy technology vs. oil companies, that “the genius of America has always depended on the strength and vitality of the middle class”.

Her criticism of McCain is only faintly more discernable than her praise for Obama (limited to “No way, no how, no McCain” and “…it makes sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities. Because these days they’re awfully hard to tell apart.”). Nothing direct, all implied by way of contrast with “me, me, ME”.

As I said above, perhaps that was the correct political tactic, if only to get the talking heads to shut the fuck up about the issue (i.e., the rifts she herself created); if so, then I guess she did a mostly admirable job. Perhaps it’ll even work as a setup for the “Clinton catharsis” I’ve been hearing so much about (the aborted roll-call that’s supposed to occur tonight), the idea being that her speech last night was a rational argument presented to irrational people, with tonight being a dissolution of the irrationality via emotional outpouring.

Speaking in political analysis terms (not how I think politics should be): will it work? I doubt it’ll have a huge effect; there’s no cure for the truly irrational. They’ll still be causing ruckus, the storyline will go on. Was it worth it? If it was a manufactured issue, as many seem to think, then no, for it could have been ignored. If it was something that truly needed to be addressed, then…still no. IMHO, a larger payoff (for Democrats) would’ve resulted from promoting unity through sharply worded negativity and explicit contrast with Republicans. Leave the inspiration and message of “change” to the actual candidate.

Either way, I certainly think that Hillary could have easily been much less self-serving simply by throwing in a few (relatively meaningless) “Obama roxxors” and “McCain is teh suxxors” comments.

Jesus, let it go. She’s behind Obama. She’s trying to herd her delegates toward him. Her speech last night was great. There’s absolutely no reason other than some sort of desire to see her eat dirt for her to have to kneel before Obama and kowtow. The primaries are OVER. Let it go.

And I say this as someone who despised both her and Bill at the nadir of the primaries. You can go look at the old threads and see what my position was at the time. I’m more than willing to have the record examined. I speak as an Obama supporter and a primary-time Clinton-hater when I say, let it go. Please. We’re no better than the PUMAs if we continue to insist on somehow punishing or humiliating the Clintons. Hillary will not be the nominee. Bill will not be back in the White House, except possibly as a guest at a state dinner. It’s over. We can’t keep gnawing at old wounds or else we’re going to bleed all over the ballots in November.

Spot on, jayjay. You nailed it.