The 2016 Democratic Candidates

[adaher]

Since Yogosouth and BrainGlutton don’t remember:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/08/blitzer-bill-clinton-asset-or-liability/comment-page-1/

Former President Bill Clinton is still out there actively campaigning for his wife. He has toned down his comments in the face of some severe criticism, especially in the days before and immediately after the South Carolina primary. In defending Hillary Clinton, he was accused of going way too far in criticizing Barack Obama. The argument was that other campaign leaders should do that – not a former President of the United States.

“She’s the best qualified person to be president I’ve ever had a chance to support, and I feel strongly about that,” Bill Clinton told a reporter from WCSH in Portland, Maine on Thursday. “And I think there’s nothing wrong with me saying that.” He then added: “But what I learned from that whole dustup, and all the things people saying that I didn’t, is that as long as I’m promoting her no one can have an objection; but I can’t defend her. Someone else has to do that.”

There is no doubt that Bill Clinton is a huge asset for his wife’s campaign. He remains extraordinarily popular among Democrats. But there is also no doubt that he can – and probably has – hurt her chances by aggressively defending her record. He now openly acknowledges that. Other surrogates and supporters will have to do the defending for him.

As 2016 nears, Clinton keeps her 2008 mistakes in mind

And in 2008, Clinton’s best asset, her husband, Bill Clinton, became an albatross. Today, the former president has a tough-minded chief of staff from Hillary Clinton’s world who tries to keep close control over his events — and his occasional off-script remarks.

In 2008, the smartest person on Clinton’s campaign, her husband, became a liability. Bill Clinton enraged black voters by comparing Obama’s victory in the South Carolina primary to the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s 1984 and 1988 victories in the state and called Obama’s anti-war position “the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

The Bill Clinton Factor: Boon or Liability?

Bill Clinton: “I am not a racist”

Bill Clinton: "I Am Not A Racist"

[iiandyiiii]

Those were boneheaded moves by Bill. It still doesn’t eliminate the typical Bill Clinton campaigning that he did, that was undoubtedly helpful to Hillary. He’s Bill Clinton. Normally an A+ campaigner – during the 2008 primary, he was a C+ or so.

He just wasn’t on his A game.

[adaher]

Because he was angry. For many of the same reasons I got angry. The Obama team was outstanding at destroying an opponent unfairly while looking innocent. That pissed Bill off and made him start ranting in public about how unfair it all was. And it was! I’ve said little here about Obama that hasn’t been said by Bill Clinton, either in public or in private. And while they’ve made up, I doubt his personal views of the man have changed. He’s just got his composure back and he doesn’t hold grudges.

But what happens when another “fairy tale” threatens Hillary’s inevitability? Like a Liz Warren.

[iiandyiiii]

@adaher

Because he was angry. For many of the same reasons I got angry. The Obama team was outstanding at destroying an opponent unfairly while looking innocent. That pissed Bill off and made him start ranting in public about how unfair it all was. And it was! I’ve said little here about Obama that hasn’t been said by Bill Clinton, either in public or in private. And while they’ve made up, I doubt his personal views of the man have changed. He’s just got his composure back and he doesn’t hold grudges.

But what happens when another “fairy tale” threatens Hillary’s inevitability? Like a Liz Warren.

You won’t be surprised that I don’t believe that you’ve “said little here about Obama that hasn’t been said by Bill Clinton, either in public or in private”. You also won’t be surprised if I don’t think you have any special insight into what Bill Clinton actually believes about Obama.

[BrainGlutton]

@adaher

But what happens when another “fairy tale” threatens Hillary’s inevitability? Like a Liz Warren.

Elizabeth Warren has said in public, repeatedly, before the press, that she will not run for president in 2016.

Therefore, the possibility is still open for speculation.

[adaher]

@iiandyiiii

You won’t be surprised that I don’t believe that you’ve “said little here about Obama that hasn’t been said by Bill Clinton, either in public or in private”. You also won’t be surprised if I don’t think you have any special insight into what Bill Clinton actually believes about Obama.

Read Game Change or any other Election 2008 book.

At least I’ve never said this about Obama:

Let’s Be Friends

Tim Russert told me that, according to his sources, Bill Clinton, in an effort to secure an endorsement for Hillary from Ted Kennedy, said to Kennedy, “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.”

I can’t wait to hear the kinds of things Clinton would say about a woman actually daring to make Hillary’s path to the nomination difficult.

[iiandyiiii]

@adaher

Read Game Change or any other Election 2008 book.

At least I’ve never said this about Obama:

Let’s Be Friends | The New Yorker

I can’t wait to hear the kinds of things Clinton would say about a woman actually daring to make Hillary’s path to the nomination difficult.

You’ve said much, much worse things about Obama. And I’ve read Game Change. I don’t think you realize the vitriol you’ve actually spewed about Obama.

[CaptMurdock]

@adaher

Read Game Change or any other Election 2008 book.

At least I’ve never said this about Obama:

Tim Russert told me that, according to his sources, Bill Clinton,

So, if I read this correctly, we have a third-hand quote of Bill Clinton.

First-hand: The unnamed “sources”

Second-hand: Tim Russert

Third-hand: “Me” AKA the author of the article.

:dubious:

I miss anything there, chief?

[Lord_Feldon]

I think it’s fourth-hand, unless Ted Kennedy was the “sources.”

[adaher]

Serious question: Why is it that everything the Clintons did and said that was unacceptable during the campaign is water under the bridge, but everything Romney said will come back to haunt him again?

I’m not asking why Democrats feel that way, I know why Democrats feel that way: because Democrats good, Republicans bad. What I want to know is why they think Clinton will receive a fresh look from voters, while Romney will be seen as the same old Romney. It strikes me that both would carry baggage.

[Rick_Kitchen]

what baggage?

And why should anything Bill said have any bearing on Hillary?

[adaher]

The Clinton campaign took a lot of heat from Democrats, saying she was hurting the party with her campaign and its tactics and that this would make Democrats less likely to vote for her if she should choose to run again.

I’ll give her credit for being smart though. She knows Democrats. She had nothing to lose by going scorched earth on Obama. Democrats have very short memories.

[wonky]

@Rick_Kitchen

And why should anything Bill said have any bearing on Hillary?

Really? This strikes me as a very naive question. Of course what Bill says will reflect on Hillary. Anyone associated with a campaign reflects upon the campaign. Ann Romney’s comments reflected on Mitt Romney during the 2012 campaign. The first rule is control your campaign, and that includes everyone in it.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

A candidate’s spouse who goes off-message will always attract unwelcome attention and criticism, especially if that spouse is a former President of the United States.

[iiandyiiii]

@adaher

Serious question: Why is it that everything the Clintons did and said that was unacceptable during the campaign is water under the bridge, but everything Romney said will come back to haunt him again?

I’m not asking why Democrats feel that way, I know why Democrats feel that way: because Democrats good, Republicans bad. What I want to know is why they think Clinton will receive a fresh look from voters, while Romney will be seen as the same old Romney. It strikes me that both would carry baggage.

Hillary Clinton came much, much closer to beating Obama than Romney did, for one thing. Further, her popularity has stayed pretty high (and was astronomical at times) – I’m pretty sure she polls way better than Romney right now. She’s actually done stuff since running for President.

[Chronos]

adaher, why all this continued talk about “the Clintons”? You seem to think that “the Clintons” is a single person. But The Clintons was never President, The Clintons was never a senator or Secretary of State, and The Clintons will never run for anything.

[adaher]

That’s probably not exactly true. After all, when people talk about how qualified Hillary Clinton is, they can’t be talking about her being a Senator. Supporters of hers were talking about her being ready to be President on Day 1 as opposed to Obama. The only explanation for that is that she was co-President, although that can never be said explicitly.

[adaher]

A couple of interesting articles about Clinton’s upcoming campaign. The first explains that she’s learned from the mistakes of 2008. Bill will be integrated into the campaign from the start. She’s going to work on better relations with the media. However, apparently she is still going to put together a possibly dysfunctional organization again, despite the fact that she recognizes it was a problem last time:

These allies also know the past problems of Clinton Inc. that could resurface: the competing Bill and Hillary camps, the questionable donors and backbiting when things get tense or go south. Clinton insiders blame a confused and conflicted ’08 structure for many of her stumbles in that primary race.

The campaign-in-waiting is working to assuage these concerns by creating a coherent leadership structure and bridging the Bill and Hillary worlds. “There’s an enormous amount of coordination and communication that goes on with his office,” an adviser said. “Everybody recognizes that it’s important.”

Here’s the rub: A trio of people with substantial juice will be above campaign manager Robby Mook — with Podesta, who is leaving his West Wing post as counselor next month for a short stay at the Center for American Progress until the campaign formally launches, serving as chairman; longtime family counselor Cheryl Mills serving as a top adviser, regardless of whether she is on the inside or outside (a possible title: co-chair); and longtime close aide Huma Abedin, the most important non-Clinton in her orbit. (When the White House wants to reach Clinton, Abedin gets the call.) Philippe Reines, one of the longest-serving Hillary whisperers, will be another crucial outside adviser.

Toss in Bill and Chelsea, and it’s clear why structure is such a stress point.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/hillary-clinton-2016-elections-114586.html

A blogger for the Washington Posts’ The Fix asks a great question. How does Hillary excite voters? She’s just not that type of candidate. The Republicans in 2008 and 2012 had to overcome a movement. In 2016 they just have to hurdle one bar: be better than Hillary Clinton. Which he believes isn’t that high a bar to overcome. I agree. She plays it overly cautious, right down the middle, never takes a chance. It’s the classic frontrunners’ strategy. And it works great. Until you get behind, in which case you’re screwed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/26/what-exactly-is-hillary-clintons-strategy-to-get-voters-excited-about-her-candidacy/

So both articles kinda ask the same question. Will Hillary be able to come back if she falls behind at any point? I doubt it.

[Jonathan_Chance]

@YogSosoth

Where he bases all his beliefs on: stone tablets discovered on the 3rd moon of Mars

Right on the line, Yog. Keep the comments impersonal, please.

[Procrustus]

How does Hillary excite voters? She’s just not that type of candidate.

I’m not that “excited” about Mrs. Clinton. However, against almost any in the Republican field, I’ll be motivated like crazy.