Jerome Armstrong (Mydd) on Clinton v. Obama...

[wyldwolf]

In the debate today Clinton's response about her negatives was spot on, saying:

"The idea that you're going to escape the Republican attack machine and not have high negatives by the time they're through with you, I think, is missing what's been going on in American politics for the last twenty years."

Clinton ended with, "I know how to beat them."

The Obama response tackles the "I'm your gal" line that Clinton used to describe her ability ("If you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl.") to beat Republicans by saying:

"If you want somebody who can bring the country together around a common purpose and rally us around a common destiny, then I'm your guy."

That's it in a nutshell, on Clinton vs Obama: pragmatic partisanship that wins vs the hope for an idealistic bipartisan politics, isn't it?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/19/143916/579

[Colobo]

1. Obama clearly won (that's the general consensus), but Clinton also did well.

[presspeal]

2. Dennis?

Dennis!:loveya:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

3. Which one would make more concessions to the right-wing?

pragmatic partisanship that wins vs the hope for an idealistic bipartisan politics

[Colobo]

4. Another one by DMC!

[wyldwolf]

6. that would be the latter in my estimation.. which brings me to another point

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the hallmark of the netroots - above everything else - been a rejection bipartisanship?

The questions on this are numerous, with one being: Does Obama believe that Republicans will suddenly let bygones be bygones and start supporting a Democratic agenda like universal healthcare and gay rights? Withdrawal from Iraq? Abortion?

Not hardly.

So what is Obama thinking he'll reach a bipartisan consensus on?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. Exactly. He is getting a free pass on "unity" (with the Republicans!)

I agree. He is basically telling us he will cave in to the right-wing yet the base does not even ask questions about how exactly he intends to achieve "unity." Unity with who? Republicans! How exactly do you achieve a semblance of "unity" (true unity is a myth and Obama should tell voters that he cannot achieve that) that? By making concessions to Republicans. Yes, by following the model of bipartisan politics championed by the likes of Lieberman and McCain...

==Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't the hallmark of the netroots - above everything else - been a rejection bipartisanship?==

From what I have seen, yes. The consensus, at least pre-Obamamania was that Democrats should fight for Democratic ideals and not worship at the altar of bipartisanship. Sure bipartisanship is good when possible but if you can pass something with 52 votes go for it. Obama presents something else. His obsession with consensus would require making enough concessions to the right-wing to achieve lopsided margins for his watered down bills.

==ith one being: Does Obama believe that Republicans will suddenly let bygones be bygones and start supporting a Democratic agenda like universal healthcare and gay rights? Withdrawal from Iraq? Abortion?==

Great question. Either he is naive or he is using this because he, like Rove/Bush in 2000, knows it polls well and people are yearning for someone to magically do what no one in 200+ years has been able to do: truly unite the country. Perhaps he will discard his central theme after winning like Bush did.

==So what is Obama thinking he'll reach a bipartisan consensus on?==

Good question. Let's look at the record. On what has he reached bipartisan consensus on in the senate? He claims to have a magic ability to bring people together. Where are the results? Where was he during the immigration debate? That would have been a great opportunity for him to use his professed magic unifying ability. Iraq? He was silent during the lead up the the second funding vote. He did not work to foster a compromise.

An Obama presidency would likely resemble Clinton's triangulating policies of the 90's. The only difference is Obama is unlikely to be anywhere near effective as Clinton was. Say what you want about Bill Clinton but under him 22 million jobs were created, we had 8 years of peace and prosperity, and he turned massive deficits into a $246 billion surplus.

[presspeal]

21. How can you reject bipartisanship?

We all live in the same country. Are you going to exile any one who disagrees with you?

[wyldwolf]

37. ask the numerous anti-DLCers on this board that. They rejected bipartisanship for years...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

47. Bipartisanship is great; sacrificing progressive principles because of a fetish for consensus is not

[flpoljunkie]

5. What has Hillary Clinton really "won?" Other than her Senate seat in a very blue state?

Certainly not healthcare. She often says she "has the scars to prove it." Prove that she waged an unsuccessful fight?

[presspeal]

7. And who has the best health care plan out there.

Come on, I know you have the name!:bounce:

[wyldwolf]

8. Did Bill Clinton complete two terms in office? Was Hillary the target of rightwing smears?

Was Hillary ever convicted of any "crimes" she was accused of?

The Clintons took on the best the rightwing could throw at them. And won.

[Larkspur]

9. Yet neither Bill nor Hillary could help Democrats retake Congress

They only won for themselves. They had no coat tails for Congressional candidates.

[wyldwolf]

14. uh.. so? lakespur, are you going to "hit and run" again or do you want to discuss this?

[rinsd]

29. Is that why there were net Dem gains in Congress 96, 98, & 2000?

[flpoljunkie]

43. The GOP smear machine is laying low for now. If she's nominated, they'll get to work immediately

on raising Hillary's negatives even higher. You can bank on it.

[BeyondGeography]

10. Is this the best you can do?

Jerome Armstrong is about as open-minded about Obama as I am about Hillary. No Earl Ofari Hutchison screeds to go along with it?

[Colobo]

11. Obama won the debate and wyldwolf knows it.

[presspeal]

13. So there could be better choices?

Maybe some one we know?:wow:
Little man, Big ideas!

[wyldwolf]

16. Well, funny you mention Earl Ofari Hutchison

This makes two writers with progressive bona-fides in two days "dis" Lord Obama. Makes one wonder...

[Colobo]

17. Who won yesterday's debate, wyld?

[wyldwolf]

20. Hillary Clinton.

An ABC poll put all three in a statistical tie on who won the debate, with varying sources saying various things.

It then comes down to opinion. MY opinion is Clinton won. Again.

[Colobo]

25. You know Obama won. You KNOW it.

[wyldwolf]

27. You know Clinton won. You KNOW it.

[Colobo]

28. For you, dear wyld.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1654198_1654197,00.html

It's ok to be on the losing end from time to time, wyld. It's ok... :)

[wyldwolf]

31. For you, dear Katzen

MARK HALPERIN 'I THINK SENATOR CLINTON ONCE AGAIN…WAS THE STRONGEST'

It's ok to be on the losing end... constantly, katzen. It's ok... :)

[Colobo]

33. Barack Obama got an A, she got an A-

Get over it, wyld, she lost this debate.

[wyldwolf]

35. ABC - Iowa source says she won

Get over it, katzen, he lost this debate.

[Colobo]

38. Check my Yepsen, Simon and Iowa Independent posts. Obama's victory

is recognized by everyone, and you should recognize it too.

[wyldwolf]

40. Check ABC News Political Radar, ABC Iowa 5, MSNBC First Read... Clinton's victory...

is recognized by everyone, and you should recognize it too.

[BeyondGeography]

30. Well, you're right

She didn't drool on herself or anything. Musta been a win.

:freak:

[jefferson_dem]

15. I'll take a positive vision of national unity and common purpose over a vitriolic claim to

win at all costs and extend partisan divisions any day.

Haven't we had enought of the latter?

EDIT: to correct "latter"

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. How? How will Obama achieve that? What concessions will he make to unite with the GOP?

It is time to fight for change, not sellout to the right-wing because of an obsession with consensus.

[DURHAM D]

19. A tough broad or a wuss. You decide. eom

[jefferson_dem]

23. I suspect most would prefer a word other than "broad"...

:bounce:

[DURHAM D]

42. I hate the word.

However, my brother (who is in his mid-60s and a Repub) used it yesterday to describe Hillary. He meant it as a very high compliment. Usually I get on him about his use of the word but I was so stunned that he plans to vote for her that I let it pass as I realized that others of his demographic would be viewing her in the same way.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. And Just What Has She Won?

I'm still trying to find a single thing that Mrs. Clinton won that had any controversy attached.

[wyldwolf]

26. you always get answered. But then you add caveats and conditions after the fact...

...in other words, you just don't like the answers you get.

Remember this thread, where even Skinner came in and busted you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3435543

[MannyGoldstein]

32. No, I Don't Remember That At All. Perhaps You Can Refresh My Memory.

I do remember a thread where Skinner suggested that I might be misunderstanding her "So if you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl." quote - he suggested that she might only be referring to her personal battles (which I disagree with). I don't think that anyone would consider this "getting busted", except perhaps the same crowd that thinks that Dean lost the 2004 elections.

If you have something else, feel free to point to it. Link or slink.

[wyldwolf]

39. I did refresh your memory -- look at the provided link in my last reply

First you asked "Can You Name A *Single* Thing That Mrs. Clinton Has Stood Up For And Won?"

Then after numerous people provided the answer, you came back waaaay down thread and "controversial."

With you, of course, being the sole determinant of what "controversial" means.

And, yes, Skinner did bust you. HERE is the conversation:

YOU: Last Night, Mrs. Clinton said "For 15 years, I have stood up against the right-wing machine. And I've come out stronger... If you want a winner who knows how to take them on, I'm your girl."

I can't name a single Democratic cause that she's taken on and won - can you?

SKINNER: She is referring to the relentless attacks that she has endured from the right-wing smear machine. And I don't think anyone here on DU -- even people who really dislike Hillary Clinton -- can deny that she was the target of one of the most intense, most relentless, and most personal sustained political attacks in recent memory. Other than her husband, who in the last decade-and-a-half has been more villified by the right wing?

So, go ahead, criticize Hillary Clinton all you like. But the facts are clear on this: She has *earned* the right to say that she stood up to the right-wing machine for 15 years.

[MannyGoldstein]

44. How Can You "Stand Up" For Something Noncontroversial?

If I'm in favor of premeditated murder being a crime, would you say that I'm "standing up" for premeditated murder being a crime?

That's just silly.

[wyldwolf]

52. when that person is Hillary and your are defining the word "controversial," you can't.

[rinsd]

41. Not playing this goal post moving game with you again.

You have proven yourself to not be interested in any answer given.

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Oh, More "Proof By Repetition"

See my above post.

[rinsd]

46. "Proof By Repetition"...LOL considering how many times you have spammed that question

Had it answered and ignored said answers...well let's just say I found your choice of phrase to be quite amusing.

[Forkboy]

24. There is a problem or two with her statement,to me at least.

First thing,her negatives are already high,I think even we can agree on that (you don't have to agree on this next part though lol),so when she says "not have high negatives by the time they're through with you... she's acting as if they're done with her,and they're not,which means her negatives could go higher (not saying they will,just that they could).If they succeed in driving the negatives of Obama or Edwards up,which they'll do,it might only reach the point that Hillary is already at.The others have that little bit of wiggle room right now...she doesn't.

Second thing:

"I know how to beat them."

No,she doesn't know because she hasn't done it yet,at least on the scale she means here (she's obviously beaten one,in a state she should have beaten one in).To be fair,no other Dem has yet either,though last November is a start for all of them.

Lastly,I don't want it to be an either/or proposition with pragmatism versus idealism.I'd like to find a mix of both (something I see in Edwards the most right now).

[BeyondGeography]

34. She beat Rick Lazio and a drunk from Yonkers

Bill is the guy who knows how to beat real Pubbie monsters. But that only leads to the "how involved was Hillary" discussion, which is a classic have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too affair. Eight years of prosperity and,eventually, budget surpluses? She's all in. The Telecommunications Act of 1996? Ask Al Gore...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

48. The Clinton-Lazio race was semi-competitive, unlike Obama-Keyes

You can't criticize HRC's electoral record and give Obama a free pass for needing a scandal to win the primary for senate and another scandal that handed him the general election on a silver platter. The fact is neither has proven they can win a tough race yet.

[SaveElmer]

49. Sun Tzu...

"To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. "


She broke the Republicans will...why no prominent Republican would step up to challenge her...

[BeyondGeography]

51. The Rudy race would have been interesting

I think she would have won a tight one, and he would have been in tears. At least part of his motivation for quitting was fear of losing. So he stays put and becomes President of 9/11, which is the only thing that could possibly have revived him politically after the public divorce and some major fumbles on police brutality cases toward the end of his second term.

If they somehow meet in the GE, we might have to call it the Marital Strife Bowl.

[presspeal]

36. I find Hillary a little too diversify(and she big business darling),

Obama is at least interesting, Edwards has a lot going for him(bless both him and his wife), but Dennis speaks for my heart.:grouphug:
Now let's have a nice civil discussion about them all.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

50. Big business supports HRC and BO about equally

Except on Wall Street, where Obama is preferred over Clinton by almost 2-to-1.