Will be interviewed together Sunday on "60 Minutes".
Hillary and Barack
|by Anonymous||reply 117||01/28/2013|
Now.. they seem to like each other now.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||01/25/2013|
I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I heard an author on CNN saying that Bill and Hillary have never been invited to the White House for dinner with the Obama family or something like that. I think there's some respect between them politically, but I don't think they are close, there's tension.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||01/25/2013|
r3, I'm sure she thought it was unfair and it hurt badly, but she understands how politics works. If she had gotten similar breaks and had a wave to ride, she would have done it too. I doubt it's personal at this point.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||01/25/2013|
They actually do like and respect each other. They patched it up after the election.
Thanks for playing, troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||01/25/2013|
R4, NOBODY has been invited to a Obama dinner, not even a Kennedy. That's how he works.
I know Hillary is not bitter about how Obama's campaign & the Dems treated her in 2008. Thats because Obama let her do what she wanted as Sec of State. She schooled him -- she told him what she was doing -- not the other way around.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||01/25/2013|
R4 -- Presidents are all in the same club so they are nice to each other, politics aside.
Nixon had Jackie to the White House and they exchanged fond letters.
I don't recall Reagan inviting Carter to TWH, but I think the First Ladies have a club of their own, too and Mrs. Carter went.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||01/25/2013|
A few years ago, this guy wouldda been servin our drinks!
|by Anonymous||reply 9||01/25/2013|
The Clintons have been to dinner with the Obamas at the White House. More than once.
It didn't start out as particularly close but the relationship between the Clintons and the President has steadily improved. During her years of exemplary service at State and the outstanding help that President Clinton gave President Obama in his re-election, the old wounds are healed.
I like Joe Biden. Other than during the Thomas hearings, I've always liked him. Still, I would never back him over Hillary Clinton. She demonstrated again this week exactly why she is the most admired woman in the world and well-suited to the presidency.
I look forward to the 60 Minutes interview and to supporting Hillary for President in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||01/25/2013|
Are they having an affair?
|by Anonymous||reply 11||01/25/2013|
You're deluded, R3. Obama didn't have to reach out to Hillary to be part of his administration. During the primaries, her overall favorability was in negative territory. Being SOS has humanized her and her favorability ratings have skyrocketed to the highest numbers of her career in recent polls. Off-the-chart numbers that will catapult her to the front-runner no matter who jumps into the primaries.
Of course I am not so in denial to deny that Hillary has also helped Obama, too, though.
I want her to run again and be the nominee during the next cycle. We're on the same team here. No need to reopen the wounds of 4-5 years ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||01/25/2013|
"Hillary, you're likeable enough."
|by Anonymous||reply 13||01/25/2013|
You're full of shit r12. If HRC was unpopular in the Primary, it was because of people like you who felt she was in the way of electing the first black President.
Do you all seriously want to relive 2008?
|by Anonymous||reply 14||01/25/2013|
"That and the media's cult-like obsession with the President during his first campaigned destroyed her chances at something she had worked torward (and deserved) for many years."
R3 - I am with you believe me, but she "DESERVED" to be President? On what basis, exactly?
I would even argue it was all in their plan to do what they could in a subtle way to insure Gore lost, which would enable her eventual ascent. Remember Gore's less than decisive win brought us a messy loss which brought us Bush and Cheney.
No more need be said.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||01/25/2013|
The only way Republicans will win the White House is by cheating and more and more people are on to their schemes now. No one wants idiotic right wing policies R17.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||01/25/2013|
The fact that Hillary is NOT bitter or still angry about the terrible way she as well as Bill were treated and smeared as racists during the 2008 primary tells me the kind of person she is. She is head and shoulders above Barack and she was back then. Barack reportedly admired and respected her before he ran for president and often sought her advice while in the Senate making his jumping the queue the way he did even more manipulative in my eyes.
Joe Biden is a small man for various reasons one being the way he continued with full knowledge of the facts to lie about his wife's death falsely blaming an absolutely blameless truck driver to gain some political points with segments of the voting public. Despite his mouth and propensity to show off during his entire career in the Senate he is also not the brightest bulb. Biden isn't even in contender weight for the presidency as far as I am concerned. He is lucky he has had as long a career as he has.
Barack is the president I expected and nothing more - a Democrat who won't betray democratic ideals for the most part. I keep hoping there is more in him that will make him greater than he has been and more than I expect. There is still plenty of time so I keep my fingers crossed for him.
I don't know either personally but I suspect Barack does like Hillary. If she was able to win over as many republicans as she has - and that is not all down to respect and politics because politicians are also human and they often end up personally liking their political enemies - then I think there is a genuine fondness for her. As for Bill it takes a lot not be charmed by him and dazzled by his brains and ability to sell anything. Look at how George Bush pere fell in love with him.
I still am moved by Barack's beautiful inaugural speech. It was much better than his first and spoke to the Democratic legacy started with FDR of moving the people forward together.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||01/25/2013|
She's going to be the front runner in 16 no matter who runs against her, if she runs. My point is that her numbers with the general electorate has increased significantly since she took part in Obama's administration, which is a win-win for all of us.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||01/25/2013|
I kind of think, if the rupublican'ts don't 'fix' the votes, we are in for a couple decades of Democratic leadership.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||01/25/2013|
I'd like to know what the Clinton's REALLY think about Obama. It's not what you'd think...
|by Anonymous||reply 22||01/25/2013|
[quote]Told Hill and Barack to be interviewed as Damage Control for the Benghazi cover-up.
Hmmmm. Even after four months, the American people just don't seem very worked up about Benghazi.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||01/25/2013|
What I believe is you're an idiot, R17.
It's the GOP attempting to RIG elections with their current activities at the state level. If we don't have another Dem, it's most likely because the shit party you apparently wanted in 2012 (or you're just a PUMA who can't get the fuck over the fact she didn't win in 2008, so you're in a perpetual state of menopausal bitchery regardless of gender) is trying to steal elections because you only use the word "democracy" (or "Republic" for that matter), but have no fucking idea what it means.
If the popular vote was how elections were won, the GOP -in its current devolved state- would never win AGAIN.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||01/25/2013|
The past is for fools in politics. Now, their interests are entirely aligned.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||01/25/2013|
Don't kid yourself. Bill will never forgive Obama for what he did to Hillary. What goes around comes around, Barry.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||01/25/2013|
The President has dinner every night with his daughters, except when he is out of DC or hosting a state dinner for a foreign visitor. He doesn't invite politicians to his family dinners. The Clintons understand this as do most Americans.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||01/25/2013|
[quote]Bill were treated and smeared as racists during the 2008 primary tells me the kind of person she is
Do you even know why Ted Kennedy chose to back Obama instead of Clinton? Shall we pull up Bill's quote about Obama at the time? That was the impetus for Teddy. Everyone knows it.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||01/25/2013|
Don't be stupid. The Clintons played the race card to pick up votes. That's why they won Kentucky and West Virginia by such huge margins. They got called racists because they were.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||01/25/2013|
Benghazi cover up, R16? You people are so painfully, embarrassingly stupid.
How about you tell everyone what the difference is regarding how and why they were killed?
You people have this fear-mongering cottage industry with zero substance.
Explain to us the cover-up and what the reason would be? I'll wait, but you won't answer.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||01/25/2013|
r23 is referring to fellow residents at the nursing home who suffer from short-term memory loss.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||01/25/2013|
[quote]Benghazi cover up
Just that Hillary was out of the loop and didn't know what was going on or how to properly communicate the issue because of this.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||01/25/2013|
'Out of the loop' and 'cover up' are two different things, dear.
You know what a cover up is? It's when a terrorist attack happens on American soil, 3500+ people die and we've not only never gotten the full story, but instead of getting the full story, our govt decides to *use* the raw emotions of a population to get a war with a country they've wanted for years before the terrorist attack.
A cover up is outing a CIA agent because her husband won't go along with the lies about vials of anthrax, WMDs and yellow cake uranium from Niger.
But yeah, clearly four deaths in a volatile, transitional nation is far more tragic and suspicious than 3500+ deaths on our soil, plus 4500 American deaths in a nation that had nothing to do with it, along with 500000+ people who also had nothing to do with it.
The rightwing is full of idiots and hypocrites who are full of shit. The more tragic aspect is we don't have enough Dems calling them out for their bullshit.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||01/25/2013|
[quote]Don't be stupid. The Clintons played the race card to pick up votes. That's why they won Kentucky and West Virginia by such huge margins. They got called racists because they were.
You don't have to play a race card in Kentucky and West Virginia. They blow in the wind like dead leaves.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||01/25/2013|
[quote]The fact that Hillary is NOT bitter or still angry about the terrible way she as well as Bill were treated and smeared as racists during the 2008 primary tells me the kind of person she is. She is head and shoulders above Barack and she was back then
They brought all that on themselves. If you don't want to be perceived as racist, don't say racist things in order to pander to racists. That wasn't Obama's fault.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||01/25/2013|
What Clinton fans always leave out of their narratives of 2008 was Hillary's subtle (actually not so subtle) endorsement of McCain during the primaries. She and McCain were capable choices but all Obama could do was make speeches. Even for those who agree it was statement that many thought could do serious harm to Obama if he beat Clinton in the primary, "A fellow, well respected Democrat thinks the party's candidate is not capable." I think that level of disrespect outstrips liking Hillary "well enough".
|by Anonymous||reply 36||01/25/2013|
Get over it, R3.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||01/25/2013|
[quote] The Clintons played the race card to pick up votes.
Complete bullshit. No they didn't.
You can keep repeating this talking point all you want and taking things out of context but it does not make it a fact that either Hillary or Bill played the race card in any way during the primary.
R34 shows an incredible lack of understanding of the politics of W Virginia and Kentucky making him feel comfortable to somehow falsely blame the Clintons for those states' failure to support Obama in the primaries.
R36 interprets any criticism of Obama as racist and therefore thinks Cinton had no right to criticize her primary opponent. Even conceding her criticism may have been accurate. Which is a ridiculous idea.
We are just seeing a repeat of the dirty pool politics employed by the Obama campaign in sending out surrogates to smear the Clintons as racists. It was a despicable lie then and it is a despicable lie now.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||01/25/2013|
"a few years ago, this guy (Obama) would have been carrying our bags." - Bill C. to Ted K.
Only a PUMA (like R38) who thinks the presidency is a throne would read that and think there was nothing racist about it and that Hilary who not only mocked Obama's message and doubled down on the neo con rhetoric which was specifically what we wanted to get rid of, but she also threw MoveOn under the bus - a group specifically formed to defend the Clintons and fight against the rightwing attacks. Why was it OK for the Clintons to attack Obama, but he wasn't allowed to fight back? You're all a bunch of Harriet Christians. Entitled fools like James Carville.
Hilary's campaign failed because of Hilary. She turned a lot of people off with her nonsense. PUMAs are far worse than Republicans because Republicans are just hypocritical morons, but these people who worship the Clintons and have the nerve to think WE worship Obama? Be serious! The woman was my senator and I voted for her every time, but her campaign was shit, as were the things that came out of her mouth. Now if you have evidence that the media you blame for her failure dubbed over her voice, then you can blame others for her campaign.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||01/25/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 40||01/25/2013|
R39, blah blah blah. The same old same old.
First you have to believe the quote is accurate or true which is triple hearsay. I never particularly trusted Tim Russert with accuracy and now that he's dead how do you ensure that is what he really told someone or what he was really told.
I think an alleged quote cited earlier in a book that Clinton allegedly made about Obama's lack of experience and meteoric rise - that a few years ago he would have been fetching us coffee like a campaign worker explains what he was talking about. It wasn't about race but about lack of experience. I'm not even sure there is a second quote and that the carrying bags quote isn't just a bastardization of the coffee quote. Even if Russert was accurate I don't trust Ted Kennedy for his honesty and I certainly don't trust him to not to have played loose with someone else's words to suit his purposes. Kennedy could be treacherous and completely dishonest when it came to campaigning for himself or others.
Again, it is easy to twist things especially when there is no proof of even the first reported quote. It is easy to take things out of context and make them fit your agenda.
Anyone who thinks Bill Clinton is a racist is just a fool or deliberately blind for whatever reasons they harbor.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||01/25/2013|
It's the white liberals that jump on that racist bullshit more than anyone else.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||01/25/2013|
Hillary, like Martha Coakley a few years later, entered the campaign with an air that her nomination was inevitable, then karma and her campaign staffing decisions came back and bit her in the ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||01/25/2013|
Everyone who runs for office needs to run with confidence. When a man does that it's admired and looked at as a sign of leadership. When a woman does it it's somehow a baaaaad thing.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||01/25/2013|
r6, what "informed source" provided you with this information?
|by Anonymous||reply 47||01/25/2013|
R42, even liberals can be racist to some extent. It doesn't have to be overt, over-the-top Klan rally racism. It can be very subtle. It can be someone thinking blacks are equal, but up to a point. I have no doubt that quote was accurate. Clinton will have black people around him as friends and advisers, but "know your place, 'boy,' when it comes to trying to take us on."
The Clintons are still politicians, just like Obama and every other douchebag in DC. It's about power and ego for all of them, so stop lionizing these people. It's embarrassing enough watching the dumbass rightwing and their obsession with Unicorn Reagan.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||01/25/2013|
[quote] If Hillary and Biden both decide to run in 2016, it should be interesting to see if the president backs one or the other
I like Biden but I hope he doesn't run because he won't ever get elected
|by Anonymous||reply 49||01/25/2013|
Obama has HIV?
|by Anonymous||reply 50||01/25/2013|
Biden running for the presidency is like Palin running. Biden couldn't raise one red cent. He's not an idiot, but plays one in public. His running would be the biggest joke ever. No one in their right minds would vote for him.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||01/25/2013|
Jesus, this thread is full of freepers and PUMA cunts. Just go away! You have no power.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||01/25/2013|
R49, I agree. Biden is not electable enough. The only way he can become President is if Obama is assaninated, and conidering how crazed the freepers are these days, such a fate is not that far-fetched unfortunately.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||01/25/2013|
Hillary in 2008, 2012...and finally at last in 2012. I'm glad Obama defeated McCain and then Romney. But to this day, I always would have preferred that Hillary had won in 2008.
Obama could have run in 2016--and that's the way I wish that it had happened. And no one will ever change my mind.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||01/25/2013|
R28, bros before hoes, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||01/25/2013|
r52 still living in 2008
|by Anonymous||reply 56||01/25/2013|
r28 do pull up that quote. Please. Once you do that I'll pull up the sexist quotes from Obama to Hillary and how his surrogates called the Clintons racists. I'll also pull up quotes from Biden about Obama.
You guys act as though Obama's campaign was clean. They play just as dirty as any other campaign.
The reason Kennedy backed Obama was because he felt slighted that Hillary did not credit his brother for the Civil Rights Acts.
If you fools want to relive 2008 so be it.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||01/25/2013|
r58 I was at the Austin Headquarter during the Primary. It was reported that Obama supporters were intimidating the Hillary voters. We kept receiving phones about the intimidation. There were complaints filed and it was suggested that the voters who felt intimidated take photos and/or record it.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||01/25/2013|
Where did I say Obama's campaign was clean, R58?
Here's what I wrote @R48
[quote]The Clintons are still politicians, just like Obama and every other douchebag in DC. It's about power and ego for all of them, so stop lionizing these people.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||01/25/2013|
I had forgotten about the xenophobia, R61. I recall that 60 Minutes interview Hillary did that also pissed me off. It was something I expect from the right, not the left.
When she said "that I know of" in reference to whether or not Obama was Muslim, WTF was that bullshit? It was absolutely bigoted. As though if he were a Muslim, that's a crime.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||01/25/2013|
r61 give one example of the Clintons being racists. Just one. r58 sums it up perfectly.
r28 still waiting for all those racists comments from the Clinton. Put up or shut up.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||01/25/2013|
Ok, Candy Crowley on CNN just said that Hillary and Bill have NOT been invited to the White House for dinner with the Obamas, but they do work well together in spite of this.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||01/25/2013|
R63? I never used the plural. I said quote, not quoteS and I already posted it. I also explained exactly my feeling on the matter. There is this sense of entitlement with the PUMAS that is simply nauseating. GTFO it. Obama didn't win because we thought he was the damned messiah. You're the ones who worship the Clintons. I sure as hell don't worship Obama or any politician, nor did I need the media to demonize Hillary for me.
I had every intention of voting for Hillary and knew almost nothing about Obama. Then I listened to her platform and all I could think was "Well, WTF are we getting rid of Bush if she's pulling the same shit as him?" We had just witnessed a disastrous foreign policy, and I listen to this woman try and prove she has balls by talking about annihilation? I also listened to all of them... all of these seasoned politicians mock candidate Obama for saying he'd go into Pakistan if he knew OBL was there. How dare this naive newbie to DC treat an ally that way? Well guess who turned out to be right?
Face the fact that her platform STUNK. She needed to purge people like James Carville. A typical DC insider and a lizard who prefers the status quo to real change. Sits there like a moron with his balls in a vise while his cunt of a wife goes off like a crazy person about the president.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||01/25/2013|
R63, She ran a disgraceful campaign. I don't recall them all but the 'madrasa' scandal is just one of many. The icing on the cake is her infamous RFK analogy. When talking to reporters about her decision to remain in the race well into June, Hillary was quoted as saying: "We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California." Talk about a botched attempt at speaking things into existence. Hillary bashed Obama harder than Mccain's camp did.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||01/25/2013|
r65 and r66 have taken the stupid pills. Obama ran a dirty campaign and the media and his crazy supporters ignored everything. You idiots won and you're still angry and still bitter about nonexisting racists comments.
So far none of you ditto heads can even produce a racist comments made by either Clintons.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||01/25/2013|
"PUMA"s never existed. They are and always have been Freepers dissembling to divide and conquer.
Clinton and Obama look great together and get along well.
Obama is a great president. Clinton will be a great president in 2016.
Anyone engaging with the obfuscation of right-wing tactics (race-cards, sexism-cards) has only themself to blame, for they are playing STRAIGHT INTO RIGHT-WING PARTY TACTICS.
You lost, fuckers. The Republican Party lost in 2008 and in 2012. And the Obamas and the Clintons worked hard both campaigns to ensure that you did lose. So get the fuck off Datalounge and take your shit-stirring elsewhere.
It is transparent.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||01/25/2013|
R66, the candidate DOES NOT RUN THEIR CAMPAIGN. She made many mistakes, as do all pres candidates. 'You're likable enough' was just one of Obama's.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||01/25/2013|
Jesus Christ, you delicate little flowers. Hillary did not run a disgraceful campign. She ran a tough, hard-driving campaign--and so did Obama. I'm glad there's a Democrat in The White House, but I wish Hillary had won.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||01/25/2013|
Obama and Clinton ran a bitter campaign against each other and Hillary was definitely worthy, but the bottom line is that Obama's machine was far more sophisticated and capable for the 21st century. It was his time and still is.
They did the right thing and realized they are more powerful together than apart. It was the smartest move in the world to put her at State, and I hope she runs in '16 - I'd vote for her in a second, not the least of my reasons being that she and Obama came to understand and respect each other, and work together.
The PUMA and forced Obama vs. Clinton shit bores me. They're both fantastic.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||01/25/2013|
[quote] The PUMA and forced Obama vs. Clinton shit bores me. They're both fantastic.
Exactly, R71. That's because the "conflict" is manufactured by Freepers. I say that as someone who voted for Clinton in the primary and volunteered my ass off for Obama in the general and was in tears of joy like everyone else when he defeated McCain. I was only happier in 2012, when he beat Romney. And I will be delighted if Clinton runs in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||01/25/2013|
R67, Politics is politics. Of course Obama's team played dirty but Hillary's camp was much more ruthless. Hillary has never made a racist remark on record but her campaign was still venomous from the start.Bill has made a racist remark with the 'A few years ago, he would have been carrying our bags.' The photograph of Obama in Kenyan garb was leaked by the Hillary campaign. Rev. Wright tape was leaked by her staff. Ironically, Rev. Wright was a visitor to the Clinton White House in 1998. Obama practically had the media masturbating to him so there was less mudslinging from his end. He was a black man with a Muslim middle name. The last thing he needed to do was be aggressive.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||01/25/2013|
I hear they're going to perform the "Sisters" song from WHITE CHRISTMAS, in matching blue lace dresses with ostrich-feather fans.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||01/25/2013|
Yes she did run a disgraceful campaign, and the reason Kennedy didn't support her is because of the way the she and Bill treated him regarding Healthcare reform issues and legislation regarding healthcare for children.
Bill promised to do something,and then turned on Teddy. Clinton demonstrated he would go with expedience over his promise, Teddy was thru with them.
Ask yourself, why so many of her senate colleagues didn't support her candidacy? Hillary listened to the wrong people and she was ill-advised, playing politics the old way in 2008.
Obama represented a fresh way to express their aspirations and didn't have the baggage the Clintons had. Axelrod & co are smart and tough and resourceful in the way the approach and look at campaign operations. Hillary's campaign was very 90's.
But enough looking backwards. Look. Hillary had no where to go. It would have been awkward for her to go back to the Senate. Instead, Thanks to Barack Obama, she redefined herself and showed the world what she could do.
So in a very real sense, Barry rescued her and she knows it. He gave her a chance to be strong leader in her own right in a way she couldn't as a US Senator. Obama let her shine, he lifted her up and celebrated her.
He has tremendous affection for Hillary and he admires and respects her as a unique historical figure. I think she has come to admire and respect him too, and they have learned from one another.
The way Obama's treated Hillary these past four years carries weight with Bill. Bill Clinton would've never done what he did for Obama this past year if they hadn't resolved their differences. I believe they are genuine friends.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||01/25/2013|
Obama got a pass for the dirty parts of his campaign, Hillary did not.
The real reason the media and the Dems wanted Obama? Because they thought he could WIN. Same as the Repubs and George W. Bush.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||01/25/2013|
R76. Teddy Kennedy was no saint. He left a girl to die at Chappaquidick and didn't report the accident unti the next day when he and his cohorts got their stories in sync. That situation goes to his moral character.
Hillary was running a political campaign which can be rough and tumble especially when the media gave Obama a pass at nearly every turn. She didn't commit a crime with someone's life at stake.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||01/25/2013|
I'm glad someone brought that up,r66. She seemed to be endorsing a hit on Obama,which was the lowest point of her campaign in my opinion...
|by Anonymous||reply 79||01/25/2013|
Damn, Freepers, just keep going...
True progressives are relieved and happy that Clinton is SOS and Obama is POTUS, and that McCain and Romney are bitter, conservative non-winners.
Freeps, on the other hand, are no doubt posting up a storm on Dataloung so that they can compose anti-Hillary and anti-Barack fanfiction to their rotten hearts' content. If they get tired of slamming one, they can always switch over and have a go at slamming the other.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||01/25/2013|
WTF, R78. Who said Teddy was a fucking saint? All I said was, the reason Teddy didn't support Hillary for president is because he had a political falling out with both of them around Healthcare politics. period.
If you'll recall 2007-2008, the Clintons were still polarizing figures with a lot of political baggage from all their opportunizing.
These past four years have been good to them. I love Hillary, but she wasn't ready to be president in 2008, and her campaign operations and her tactics demonstrated that. And do remember one thing. Of course Axelrod/Obama ran a tough campaign. But they ran a damned good campaign. When I say good I mean well run, operationally.
Rationalize all you like, but Obama won. period. And in case anyone doubted how good they are, the Obama team did not have the media on it's side in 2012. He had baggage, he made missteps and he still beat ROmney. With all the money in the world, they couldn't beat him.
It was Obama who called on Hillary, which also allowed him to call on Bill at the right time. Obama gave her the opportunity to shine on the world stage. The fact that she seized that opportunity and she did an outstanding job, and that she owns the ground she stands on, is Hillary's doing.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||01/25/2013|
[quote}]Don't kid yourself. Bill will never forgive Obama for what he did to Hillary. What goes around comes around, Barry.
LOL. What's he gonna do? Stop a third term? And don't call me Barry.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||01/26/2013|
Wolf Blitzer and Kate Baldwin did a piece today on The Situation Room on how their relationship grew after the 2008 election.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||01/26/2013|
[quote]Rationalize all you like, but Obama won. period. And in case anyone doubted how good they are, the Obama team did not have the media on it's side in 2012.
Both Obama campaigns are for the history books and will be studied for years and years. Even Romney appropriated some aspects of Obama '08. And it's true, the media and wall street were not on his side for 2012 but they just couldn't beat his machine.
Bill understands they'll need this same machine for Hillary to win in 2016 especially after the news they plan to continue after Obama leaves. They'll also need the same black constituency they alienated in 2008 to turn out for Hillary like they did for Barack. So PUMAs harping on the Clinton's alleged mistreatment will only diminish her chances.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||01/26/2013|
DOMA, DADT ... the Clintons couldn't even pass health care reform. Barack Obama's already a great president.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||01/26/2013|
R84, I agree that people shouldn't be sour over Hillary's 2008 loss. She has gotten over it, and eventually Bill did too. And just as Bill & Hillary helped Obama lot by campaigning for him, Obama will no doubt help Hillary in 2016 if she is the nominee.
Remember though that Hillary is MORE popular now than she was in 2008 with Independents and Moderate Republicans so she will be less dependent on the Black vote.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||01/26/2013|
Obama fangirl at R85 you are being just as silly as some of the unobjective Hillary supporters from 2008.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||01/26/2013|
Bill saying that a few years ago Obama would have been fetching them coffee isn't racist. It's a true statement of fact. The dude came out of nowhere. I think he's mostly been a good President--mostly--but he certainly did not have the experience or background that would necessarily prepare him for being a good President. He might have been a colossal disaster.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||01/26/2013|
Does it really matter if they are best friends? They seem to have a good working relationship and Hillary is smart enough to tie her boat to his. Maybe this time she will learn from Obama and run a 21st century campaign and not a Clinton, southern moderate triangulation 1992 let's try to win over white people who won't vote for us anyway, campaign.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||01/26/2013|
I hope they do the Hot Honey Rag!!
|by Anonymous||reply 90||01/26/2013|
There is just the one person using the word PUMA still in 2013, correct?
Just want to make sure.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||01/26/2013|
"Face the fact that her platform STUNK. She needed to purge people like James Carville."
Carville wasn't involved with Hillary's presidential campaign.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||01/26/2013|
"she also threw MoveOn under the bus"
No, that was Obama:
***Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Monday, in a major speech on patriotism, criticized MoveOn.org for referring to Gen. David Petraeus as General Betray Us last year.
The Illinois senator said politics too often seems "trapped in old, threadbare arguments" that he called "caricatures of left and right." The Democrat argued that "given the enormous challenges that lie before us, we can no longer afford these sorts of divisions."***
|by Anonymous||reply 93||01/26/2013|
I'm looking forward to the 60 Minutes Interview. The clip I saw clearly shows that Barry is smitten with her. In a platonic way.
I agree with R84, R85, R88, & R 89.
Whether they were directly, obviously involved or not, and some from the old Clinton cabal definitely were, Carville and others like Lanny Davis, amd Harold Ickes were "whispering in her ear." Rahm Emanuel was the only guy who held back, then jumped for Barack and Axe.
I still begrudge them Howard Dean's shabby treatment. Howard engineered the "50 state strategy" that regained Congress in '06. Thru it all, he had to fight Rahm trying to strong-arm campaign funds for the DCCC.
Rahm, demonstrating the limited, poor judgement that proved to serve him so effectively in the WH for Obama, insisted Dean ought to be targeting specific, "winnable" races, and not try to win in other states. Hah.
After the 06 midterms, Carville & the Clinton cabal tried to engineer a coup d'etat at the DNC. Dean was going to be "neutral" in '08 as a DNC Chair should be. So Carville and his gang went after Dean, who was probably the most effective DNC chair since Ron Brown.
They failed to oust Dean, buty went to various state party chairs to stop Obama, even insured his name wouln't appear on the ballot in some state primaries.
They had limited success and offended and alienated a lot of grass roots party regulars. Their whole "inevitable" game blew up in their faces. So yes, run from Carville, Ickes, and Lanny Davis. Obama, as I have said, made the Hillary in '16 possible. He gave her a chance.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||01/26/2013|
R85, actually both those horrible acts were part of the process of gaining rights that cane about as the Clinton's pushed for them as awful as they were. R85, sometime so a little reading and find out what Clinton did by executive order for us- that turned corporate Anerica around on our rights and more or less brought the issues into public debate. In the GHW Vush administration blackmail was business as usual.
Hillary and the Pres are mature political rivals and colleagues. There is no doubt they have enormous respect for each other and the public good in mind rather than their own interpersonal issues if there are any at this point. Ditto Bill. This is not my opinion, but pretty much what I have been told by a close friend, who is close to all of them both of them, personally with Hillary and professionally with the Pres.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||01/26/2013|
[quote] "she also threw MoveOn under the bus" No, that was Obama:
No, just for the record, it was Clinton.
Clinton Slams Democratic Activists At Private Fundraiser
At a small closed-door fundraiser after Super Tuesday, Sen. Hillary Clinton blamed what she called the "activist base" of the Democratic Party -- and MoveOn.org in particular -- for many of her electoral defeats, saying activists had "flooded" state caucuses and "intimidated" her supporters, according to an audio recording of the event obtained by The Huffington Post.
"Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said to a meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."
|by Anonymous||reply 96||01/26/2013|
If Hillary runs for office in 2016 and you don't vote for her out of spite because of some alleged motives that were fabricated in your mind to suit your own agenda's, then you're a fucking moron.
Both candidates ran dishonest campaigns at times. That's unfortunately the way it is. Clinton threw Move on under the bus like Obama threw Dean and Wright.
And bringing up Ted Kennedy. The main reason that tub of lard endorsed Obama was because he was guilty over how he fractured the democratic party in 1980 by challenging Carter. Kennedy helped allow Reagan into the White House.
Plus, he wanted Caroline to carry on his political legacy. Caroline was a staunch Obama supporter. Kennedy did the obvious. Of course that all backfired on her anyway.
Let's enjoy the next four years, and fight to get another four under the belt. And if it comes down to Hillary, DEAL WITH IT.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||01/26/2013|
R81 - Hillary was not ready to be pres in 2008, but half a page resume Obama WAS? LOL.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||01/26/2013|
Yes. I base this on the way the campaigns were run, and how she responded tactically, to her opponent. Her strategy, her resource management and allocation, and her inability to distinguish between her assumptions and the realities "on the ground."
I love Hillary and was disappointed by what I saw from her campaign, from her, and from her husband. She did not exhibit good judgement and stayed completely off balance, as if she were operating in a parallel universe disconnected from reality.
She also was not able to raise money.(A lot of that might've been due to who was making the calls. Ickes and some others turned a lot of potential supporters off.) Compare her to Obama who, as you point out had a "half page resume." Resumes, as any manager will tell you, don't mean a lot when you are demonstrably unable to perform.
If Hillary runs for President in 2016, we'll see a very different campaign, with a younger, more supple crew, and we will see an agility and a better candidate. She wasn't a good candidate in 2008. I stand by that.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||01/26/2013|
Bill campaigned for Barack because he appreciates what he did for Hillary by picking her as SoS. Nothing can stop her in 2016, with that resume.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||01/27/2013|
R99, it's not about the campaign. The question is about experience.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||01/27/2013|
I truly believe had Hillary been elected in 2008 we'd be looking at a Romney Presidency right now. People want a President who they perceive as tough and who can make hard decisions especially during difficult times. Too many people don't think of women this way. I think that would have given Romeny the edge and the Presidency.
By making Hillary SOS Obama helped shore up that perception clearing her way for 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||01/27/2013|
Plueeeze. Everyone perceives Hillary as tough. In 2007, there was a poll taken about which candidate of the top three was the most macho - she won over Obama and Edwards.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||01/27/2013|
Speaking of Edwards, is he OK health wise?
|by Anonymous||reply 104||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 105||01/27/2013|
He was scared of her!
|by Anonymous||reply 106||01/27/2013|
[quote]I truly believe had Hillary been elected in 2008 we'd be looking at a Romney Presidency right now. People want a President who they perceive as tough and who can make hard decisions especially during difficult times. Too many people don't think of women this way. I think that would have given Romeny the edge and the Presidency.
Oh, dear. You're an idiot from another time.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||01/27/2013|
[quote]Bill campaigned for Barack because he appreciates what he did for Hillary by picking her as SoS.
No, Bill loves the spotlight. The man could sell anything to anybody, and he saved Obama's ass this time. His speech at the convention was amazing.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||01/27/2013|
I think if Hillary is elected in 2016, the Republicans will have a difficult time aggressively opposing her in the same fashion they have President Obama. They already have a gender problem. Playing that strong arm routine with Hillary will mean their complete annihilation.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||01/27/2013|
R3 is a fucking nutcase.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||01/27/2013|
ABC News: Bitter Rivals Obama, Clinton Now Bosom Buddies
In something of a parting gift, President Obama is making abundantly clear his deep support and fondness for outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
|by Anonymous||reply 111||01/28/2013|
This thread is full of mostly press story lines that have small bits of truth to them and are of course from the past. Reading through this thread you can see why the press comes up with the bullshit stories it does- people buy it hook line and sinker. Fact is back then and now, practically nothing separates the Hillary and Obama. They had to nitpick to find stuff- and they did- and you all are still doing it.
Two terrifically smart and able politicians of enormous integrity and commitment to the greater good. Can you think of two Republicans who fought it out in a primary you could put together on 60 minutes who are in their league?
Would you rather is was oh say, John McCain taking to W after 4 years of McCain post Bush?
Give it a break and say a quiet thank you for our great good fortune to have these two sane and hardworking politicians on the front lines of American leadership.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||01/28/2013|
[quote]Bill campaigned for Barack because he appreciates what he did for Hillary by picking her as SoS.
Are you for real, Pollyanna? They're all politicians. It's about wheeling and dealing. Obama probably promised to go around campaigning for Hillary if/when she runs in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||01/28/2013|
Amen, charlie, Amen!
|by Anonymous||reply 114||01/28/2013|
I started reading this post by starting on the last page. Charlie's post at r112 is the right answer so I think I'll stop there.
Charlie, you rock.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||01/28/2013|
January 28th, 2013
We Only Fight When We Can’t Win
President Obama’s second inaugural address was a barnstormer: aggressive, expressing a strong liberal vision, even merely progressive. Where was this man four years ago, when he actually had a chance of enacting the policies he said that he favored? Back then, he was a right wing accommodationist. Nobody really knows what’s going on inside his head, but it’s a fair guess that like a lot of other Democrats he only fight hard when he knows he can’t really win.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||01/28/2013|
Leading Republicans, spooked by the election results, polls that show that the voters of the future are liberal on gays, abortion and other social issues, and possibly from finally having picked up dogeared copies of the prescient tome The Emerging Democratic Majority at Books-a-Million, are freaking out in the weirdest possible way. Something has to be done! But not if it requires compromising on our core values. Um, guys…white guys…old white guys…the problem is that the voters don’t like Republican core values. Or you personally. So what is to be done? Something!
You almost have to feel sorry for Republicans. Sure, they started a bunch of crazy wars that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and they opened a string of concentration camps around the world, and they rolled back 800 years of cherished civil liberties that go back to the Magna Carta. But it’s sad to watch the mighty crash like a dictator’s statue pulled down by invading Marines. Not only is a sorta black man in the White House, all the GOP’s classic election-stealing tricks – corrupting the Supreme Court, bullying recount officials with paid thugs, moving voting booths out of minority neighborhoods – aren’t enough to close the growing gap between their obsolete stances and an increasingly left-leaning electorate. Now they’re so desperate that they’re even flirting with rejiggering the Electoral College, an institution that historically benefits Republicans, in order to suck out two or three more terms with them in control of the House – forget the Senate – before fading away into Whig-like oblivion as the Democrats retaliate.
Not to say that the Democrats are walking the straight and narrow road of sanity.
Americans of all political stripes say there’s one issue that consumes them most. One thing that they think about all the time. Something personal, something that affects everything else. Happily, it’s something that the government not only can do something about, but has been able to address many times in the past. I am talking about, obviously, the economy. Unemployment. Underemployment. The fact that there are no jobs. And that the jobs that are being created are all crappy. Or are in another country. Americans have been remarkably consistent about this. It would be hard to think of another time when people told pollsters for four years in a row that the same issue was the number one issue in the country. Whatever his other challenges, President Obama certainly doesn’t have to wonder about what’s on our minds.
So what is his second-term agenda? Given that his laissez-faire approach to the economic collapse throughout his first term basically involved golfing a lot while hoping that magical market forces would revive on their own, you might think that he would focus in like a laser-guided drone on the economy – you know, the number one most important issue to most Americans – this time around. But no, everyone’s telling us that Obama’s ambitious second-term agenda is – wait for it – gun control, immigration and climate change.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||01/28/2013|