# The Great Un-Fork Hillary Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 12, 2015, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458 "2015-04-12T00:17:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2015, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/201 "2015-04-17T15:49:46Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > She won’t be JUST like Obama, obviously. She’ll be more hawkish, more friendly to Wall Street, and in general I just have more confidence in her leadership abilities. I agree that she’ll be more hawkish (as the book excerpt shows) and probably more Wall Street friendly. This makes me _less_ confident in her leadership abilities, however - while I think she’s calmed down somewhat from 2008, she still has a massive chip on her shoulder and that’s the sort of thing that drives leaders to make ill-judged decisions. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2015, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/202 "2015-04-17T17:33:30Z")
No question that she is not progressive enough for a fair number of Democrats and personally I’ve preferred Obama’s more restrained approaches and I am not much of a progressive. Of course that makes her more electable in the general rather than less. She will continue to defend the Obama financial reforms and identify them as what she would have done as well. But at the same time Wall Street knows they can work with her. The progressives will perhaps not be completely mollified but they will work for her because they know the alternative is much much worse. But she is a centrist not a progressive and while Wall Street will have to deal with her working to defend the reforms that have already been done, they know that cracking down on them more won’t be job one for her. ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2015, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/203 "2015-04-17T19:19:55Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > A more offense-based approach where she points out all the things the current administration has accomplished - with Obamacare front and center - will probably serve her better; the people who hate Obama already hate her and won’t change, and everyone else will be reminded that the Democrats achieved some good stuff in the face of unprecedented opposition. It’s a ballsy strategy but she’s pretty ballsy. I think she can sorta do both. She can hold up the accomplishments of the past two terms while still making the argument that she’s her own person. I don’t think she’ll fall into the trap of trying to distance herself from Obama too much, but she has enough recognition and clout to not seem like “more of the same.” She’s not _just_ Obama’s third term, she was also a public figure who lived in the White House during the last major period of economic prosperity in this country. I don’t think people have quite forgotten that, even though it’s not really something she can lead with. Obama has suffered on the left from a perception that he’s not good enough at politics to actually get things done, and…well, I don’t think people are going to say Clinton isn’t politicky enough. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/204 "2015-04-18T00:44:27Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > I agree that she’ll be more hawkish (as the book excerpt shows) and probably more Wall Street friendly. This makes me _less_ confident in her leadership abilities, however - while I think she’s calmed down somewhat from 2008, she still has a massive chip on her shoulder and that’s the sort of thing that drives leaders to make ill-judged decisions. Leadership ability is entirely separate from ideology. I think that Clinton’s “3am phone call” ad was effective, at least for me, because it reminded me that Clinton had more experience and knowledge of foreign affairs than Obama did. Plus every book I’ve read about the Clinton and Obama administrations portrays her as decisive where her husband and Obama tended to waffle and put off making decisions as long as possible. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/205 "2015-04-18T00:52:22Z")
> [@typoink](#): > > I think she can sorta do both. She can hold up the accomplishments of the past two terms while still making the argument that she’s her own person. I don’t think she’ll fall into the trap of trying to distance herself from Obama too much, but she has enough recognition and clout to not seem like “more of the same.” > > She’s not _just_ Obama’s third term, she was also a public figure who lived in the White House during the last major period of economic prosperity in this country. I don’t think people have quite forgotten that, even though it’s not really something she can lead with. > > Obama has suffered on the left from a perception that he’s not good enough at politics to actually get things done, and…well, I don’t think people are going to say Clinton isn’t politicky enough. John McCain had a career long reputation as a maverick, and as the 538 article points out, he did manage to exceed GWB’s favorability rating by 12 points, which is remarkable. But he still lost because the “Bush’s third term” attacks hurt. If McCain couldn’t completely deflect such attacks, Clinton won’t be able to. She’s not a maverick, she actually worked in his administration and owns its first term foreign policy(which is better than it’s second term foreign policy, so that might be a plus). ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/206 "2015-04-18T00:57:54Z")
I’m really thinkin’ that “Obama’s third term” isn’t going to carry the negative impact of “Bush’s third term” for anyone but reactionary lunatic teabaggers who aren’t sure they approve of fire yet\*. \*And DEFINITELY don’t approve of government-supplied fire to any of THOSE people like Obama tried to ram down their throats… ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/207 "2015-04-18T01:35:14Z")
Not the same impact, but enough of one to be a negative. Her favorability is very close to his, so he has more power over her election than she does. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/208 "2015-04-18T01:53:25Z")
I’ll be sure to be guided by your flawless track record. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/209 "2015-04-18T02:17:21Z")
In this case, it’s Nate Silver’s, not mine. ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/210 "2015-04-18T06:54:04Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I think that Clinton’s “3am phone call” ad was effective, at least for me, because it reminded me that Clinton had more experience and knowledge of foreign affairs than Obama did. Oh, so _you’re_ the one! ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/211 "2015-04-18T07:44:20Z")
I find it hard to believe that even Nate Silver is saying anything at all definitive about who’s going to win 19 months before the election. Not even the Wizard of Odds can manage that trick. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/212 "2015-04-18T08:06:35Z")
And neither did I. I only said that Clinton’s fate is tied to Obama’s since her favorability tracks closely with his. And past candidates trying to succeed candidates of the same party have also seen their favorability closely track the incumbent’s. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Quatro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bc8723/32.png) [@Mr\_Quatro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Quatro)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/213 "2015-04-18T10:05:45Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > If you do not think that there is a whole team preparing the answer for that and many other predictable questions and prepping her mightily you are not thinking too hard. > > It is a major marketing question: how much do you distance yourself from the current administration and how much do you attach yourself to it? Gore had gone the distancing himself route and it did not play out too well. > > Options: > > Refuse to second guess with 20/20 hindsight as unhelpful and answer with forward looking responses. Confirm that there were indeed vigorous discussions of her expressing her views while she served and that her perspective did not always carry the day. Reference only those that are already public record however. Again refocus on the future. > > Honest critiques and compliments drawing compare and contrasts. > > Answer only in the broadest vaguest terms. **Answer only in the broadest vaguest terms** When caught in a corner of course till the time keeper says “Your time is almost up” Good answer … in other words she will be ready to dodge anyone catching her on a major topic. Boils down to who she is running against … Would any democrat be ill advised to run against her in the primaries or would they be like the thoroughbred race horses that have another horse to steady them down for the race? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/214 "2015-04-18T12:12:43Z")
> [@Mr\_Quatro](#): > > **Answer only in the broadest vaguest terms** > When caught in a corner of course till the time keeper says “Your time is almost up” > Good answer … So you think answering in the broadest vaguest terms is the better answer than confirming the differences of opinion with President Obama that you had while deferring to him as in-charge and at the same time complimenting all that you think did right, with the economy, with the Affordable Care Act, and with trying to reach out across the aisle even when his hand was slapped down multiple times? I am not so sure myself. To my ear that question is a softball that Clinton will be begging to be asked. The exact tone in which it is answered will be calibrated, as you note, depending on who she is running against (and how she wants to compare and contrast with that candidate) and the magnitude of Obama’s popularity at the time, in particular his popularity with groups that she needs good turn out from. Remember that for both of them there is a solid 45% who are committed disapprovers. That said [Obama’s approval](http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx) has been running about 47 to 48%, about what Reagan was running third April after re-election, no where near as well as Bill Clinton was running, and much better than GWB was (48, 60, and 37 respectively). His approval [among](http://www.gallup.com/poll/121199/Obama-Weekly-Job-Approval-Demographic-Groups.aspx) those who potentially swing, the “independents” is in the 45 plus range lately, and the “moderates” is running 58 to 60. Among those who need to come out in adequate numbers, the liberals 79 to 80. If it stays here or improves she will calibrate more tightly to his tenure than if something happens to make it drop horribly. The fact that only 26% of conservatives and only 14% of Republicans approve of Obama is immaterial as those are not votes she will win in any case. They can drop to zero for all she should care. Today’s Silver is not the Silver of yesteryear. He has become just another of those who old Silver mocked, another branded talking head, dependent on creating a horse race narrative for clicks. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/215 "2015-04-18T12:46:40Z")
He cited hard numbers: candidates seeking to succeed a President of their own party tend to have favorability ratings close to the incumbent’s. Clinton is not the type of candidate to break that trend. Not a maverick, not an outsider, not a new face. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2015, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/216 "2015-04-18T19:26:51Z")
The number he gave were hard, the analysis he offered fairly superficial, seemingly done to justify the needed talking head conclusion: “Get ready for an extremely competitive election.” Drilling into the numbers even a little? Nah, he didn’t bother. Obviously he in reality appreciates that complete unfavorablity among Conservatives is not much more of an impact that a much less severe rating - she is not getting their votes in any case. And be it 60 or 95 favorable among liberals they will still vote against the GOP candidate. The rating that matters is among the moderates. And there Obama runs 58 to 60 favorable and Clinton will, by virtue of her being much more of a centrist both in perception and in reality, likely do better than that. 1960 - Nixon’s favorability tracked the popular Eisenhower’s and was 79% … Nixon should have blown the opposition away with that sort of favorability. But who did Marilyn sing Happy Birthday Mr. President to? But favorability of the incumbent is enough to prognosticate off of. I am a bit amused by his selective reading of [what he claimed](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/02/04/emerging_democratic_majority_--_rip_125492.html) discussed a selective reading about the demographic advantage as he somewhat dismissed it. The actual conclusion of that opinion piece? > [@](#): > > In 2016, Democrats have as their likely nominee possibly the single strongest candidate for putting the old Democratic coalition back together again. I think with an adequately strong economy and a campaign founded in progressive centrism, Hillary Clinton could very well put together a broader coalition than Obama’s, and a victory that eclipses his. Seriously this is talking head babble desperate to create a horse race. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/217 "2015-04-19T03:43:47Z")
There will be a horse race. No attempt at a third term by a party holding the White House has failed to be a horse race. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/218 "2015-04-19T04:56:53Z")
Maybe yes … but boy there is a pretty small n there (three in the modern era) and one of them is GH Bush v Dukakis with GH Bush running for the third term and what a horse race that was, 426 to 111 in the electoral college and an over 6 point popular vote spread. In the other direction is McCain’s third GOP term not being too much of a horse race at the end of the day. And two close ones - Gore’s popular vote victory but electoral college loss and Nixon’s narrow loss to JFK on the heels the very high favorability rated Eisenhower incumbency. So factually you are wrong even with the small n. No more and no less of a tendency to be close or blow outs than Presidential elections otherwise. It may end up being a horse race … but calling it thus at this point based on that sort of analysis is either not knowing better or knowing better but saying it anyway out of self-interest. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/219 "2015-04-19T05:22:18Z")
1988 was a horse race. The ending doesn’t tell you how competitive it was. Dukakis led by what, 20 points at one point? A debate and an ad were the difference in that race. The other examples are Nixon-Kennedy, Humphrey-Nixon, Ford-Carter, and Gore-GWB. All razor thin margins, all four went to the challenging party. The McCain example is interesting because it shows that if your incumbent is unpopular, your best chance is a maverick. No one did better than McCain at outperforming the incumbent. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458/220 "2015-04-19T12:25:57Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The McCain example is interesting because it shows that if your incumbent is unpopular, your best chance is a maverick. No one did better than McCain at outperforming the incumbent. McCain hasn’t been a “maverick” since 2000, and Obama isn’t particularly unpopular. Certainly not even close to as unpopular as Bush in 2008. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-great-un-fork-hillary-thread/717458.md?page=12)