Clinton Backlash = What have you done for me lately?

[TheDonkey]

Seriously.

I had a friend tell me she is voting for Clinton because she liked the Clinton years and didn't understand why Hillary wasn't doing better. "Doesn't everyone want to have that type of prosperity back?" She questions.

Well I am pretty sure why people are not buying that line. IN 8 years of terror under the Bush regime what have the Clintons done, where have they been? While Hillary was busy standing in the shadows not trying to mess up her future bid for the WH we've been through hell. Yes the late 90s were excellent but follow that up with the most destructive presidency in a generation and you are going to get some pissed off Democrats.

What have the Clintons' done for me lately and why should they feel entitled for me to vote for Hillary.

[Johnny__Motown]

1. Tech bubble prosperity won't be coming back, Electing a Clinton won't create another tech boom

Why in the world do people think that Bill created that prosperity?

[leftofthedial]

3. in fairness, innovation- and merit-based segments of the economy do well under Dems

oil and war and utilities do well under repukes

Clinton had virtually nothing to do with the tech boom, but with intelligent people in office, some sort of tech industry could come back

[sandnsea]

4. An Alternate Energy Boom

Giving people and local govts tax credits, loans, grants, etc., can contribute to a boom. The money invested in the internet helped, but I give that credit to Al Gore. Wiring our schools and all that sort of thing was his idea.

[MagsDem]

10. Because they are smart?

In fact, Bill Clinton was one of the first presidents in history to actually enact legislation with a long view to "investing" in our future. If you are up for educating yourself find a copy of Bob Woodward's book called "The Agenda." It was written in the early to mid 90's and is a detailed account of Clinton's first years in office, where he passed the economic proposals that were designed to advance his agenda. The interesting thing about the book is that it was published prior to the passage of those bills actually having their intended effect.

It's quite fascinating to read it from an historical perspective because what you will learn is that it worked almost completely as planned. If you are really interested in exactly how Clinton's policy allowed the tech boom to happen and for the economic prosperity to occur you'll seek out a copy, although I doubt, from reading your posts, that you'd actually want to know that.

[leftofthedial]

2. it's a fair question

[MagsDem]

8. So vote for Obama, who has NO track record?

No, it's not a fair question. It's a question borne of an inability to use logic. If your criteria is what have you done for me lately, how to you justify voting for a guy who has done nothing, lately or otherwise?

[leftofthedial]

19. it's not a matter of support for Obama--I don't support him either. I'm undecided.

But several "what have you done lately" issues cast doubt about Clinton. First, she was not her husband. She did not create the prosperity of the 90's. Neither did Bill Clinton for that matter, although he at least was smart enough to stay the hell out of the way and not screw with it. But there is no reason to expect that she would usher in an era of prosperity. Frankly, she doesn't propose to change the economic trajectory of the country enough to have any real effect.

More importantly, She has been a hawkish supporter of king george's invasion and occupation of Iraq--unapologetically so until she started campaigning, when she suddenly started using unconvincing double-talk to backtrack from her record. Her recent explanations of her record are either an insult to my intelligence or are an admission that she does not have the smarts or the guts to be President. I perhaps could forgive her record, if I found her campaign double-talk about it the least bit convincing. I find it *very* hard to get past her unambiguous record as either a sucker for the neocons or as a co-collaborator in a crime against humanity. Obama's record is at least ambiguous on the issue.

Also, she has been part of the DC elite for nearly two decades. Even the "good eight years" when she was First Lady, are widely seen by many progressives as having sown the seeds of the disaster of the last eight years. Like her husband, she is a dedicated "free-market" advocate. She is a key player in the DLC, which I personally detest. IMHO the DLC has gutted the Democratic Party, represents corporate interests above all, sided consistently with repukes on key economic issues, alienated most of its natural constituency and left tens of millions of American workers and their families struggling just to survive. Is Obama any better? I doubt it, but I *know* where Clinton stands.

Personally, I am not convinced that Obama is fundamentally different from Clinton. But he is either less of a purely political creature or has at least has been one for a shorter time. I don't see that much of substance to distinguish them, so any doubts I have about either of them, based on known record, weigh heavily. It is not illogical to prefer someone new over someone who represents the status quo.

[casus belli]

5. Well, one could argue...

...that it's like seeing the Rolling Stones in concert in 2008. Just not the same thing as it was, and never will be again.

If somebody wants to vote for her because they think she's got the right stuff to take the country forward...then right on. Do what you gotta do. But, electing someone to try to relive the past is nonsense. Just ask the organizers of Woodstock 1999 how easy conjuring up a replica of the past is.

[MagsDem]

9. Or, you could just call it a good track record and experience vs.

no track record and no experience.

[Fredda Weinberg]

6. The Big Dog set up his office in Harlem and has been promoting

good works globally. HRC has been a spectacular junior senator, working well w/others and keeping a modest profile.

Your attitude reminds me of a child ... what have you done for *me* lately ... well, the Clintons have lived upstanding lives.

[Skidmore]

11. And, on the other hand,

Bill has become an adopted member of the Bush family, while Hillary has been careful not to rock the boat in a manner that has enabled a war criminal to run roughshod over the nation. Yes, the OPs question is right on target.

[Fredda Weinberg]

21. Yeah, those humanitarian missions are such a capitalist tool

And HRC is junior senator, trying to prove she can get along. You wouldn't appreciate a diamond if it shone before you, so why expect you see one in the rough?

[Skidmore]

22. ROFLOL!

Fool's gold sparkles too.

[MagsDem]

7. Because Obama hasn't done a thing for you lately or otherwise

Seriously. Do you even think these kinds of things through before you post them?

"Yes the late 90s were excellent but follow that up with the most destructive presidency in a generation and you are going to get some pissed off Democrats."

WTF does that mean? It's Bill and Hillary's fault that Bush is a gigantic fucking moron?

[Sadie5]

12. Quit picking on Obama

While Hillary was ruining the lives of others by being in the senate good old Obama was "present". So as you can see Obama did nothing wrong. It's all Hillary's fault for allowing the people who elected her to see what she was doing in the senate. Shame on the Clinton's for crossing the aisle to help the victims of Katrina. Obama wants to, "reach out" to those who are more reaganesque, but that's OK, because it's Obama ya know.

[rodeodance]

13. Both have lead productive lives.

What have the Clintons' done for me lately and why should they feel entitled for me to vote for Hillary.

[rodeodance]

14. She as a Senator and Bill in Harlem.

[jasmine621]

15. Bill has been doing a lot for raising funds for Katrina victims and AIDS

victims around the world.

[jasmine621]

16. Americorp: the gift from Bill Clinton that keeps on giving.

We seem to forget anything good that Clinton did.
http://www.americorps.org/

[LisaL]

17. And what has Obama done for you lately?

Do tell.

[KittyWampus]

20. he's rebuilding the Democratic party which the DLC & Clintons nearly starved to death

[rodeodance]

18. "What have the Clintons' done for me lately"---its all about you, just you?

What have the Clintons' done for me lately and why should they feel entitled for me to vote for Hillary.

[TexasObserver]

23. Hillary had absolutely nothing to do with the prosperity of the 90s.

And she's been a DLC toadie since 2000.

[Fredda Weinberg]

24. Going to that women's conference was absolute bubkus. In fact,

don't you remember how she embarrassed all of us and oh, that it takes a village crap she preached ... no one listened 'cause she was a nobody.

Give me a friggin' break.