One thing Obama and all Dems should learn from HRC - Ruthlessness....

[HardWorkingDem]

If I can state one thing that continually surprises me about Democrats in campaigns is how many times Democrats seem to get surprised at how ruthless other campaigns can be.

The Dems still seem to always fight campaigns with some concept of "rules" and when they catch the shiv right in the back, they think citizens will even give a shit such a foul has been pulled. For one thing, the general citizenry does not give one iota of concern over how campaigns are won, only that they are won. Rarely are their do-overs and Dems need to remembers this.

Michigan and Florida are perfect examples of how HRC knows this and Obama does not. Why in the hell did all the other Dems even agree not to have their names remain on the Michigan ballot if they knew HRC was going to leave hers on their? And then, when all of the others promised not to campaign in Florida, they failed to even consider HRC making "stops" in Florida that were not "campaign" stops.

Someday Dems will realizes campaigns and the people that certain campaigns are ruthless and the process should be added to the old parable of how no one should watch behind the scenes to see how campaigns are run, just like how sausage and laws are made.

[DJ13]

1. If we all learn ruthlessness how does the voter know we arent Republicans?

If you want us to imitate the enemy we become the enemy dont we?

[HardWorkingDem]

8. Explained in #7.....nt....

...

[Cosmocat]

24. It just is a different time AND Obama is ...

A different candidate ...

Hill and Bill cut their teeth when the Rs were trending up ... They had the "moral high ground" as they staked it, they were merciless and relentless, and Hill and Bill had to do WHATEVER THEY COULD to survive their relentless attacks ...

She of course is responsible for herself, but I have a part of me that I want to believe that she is just operating from the mindset she has learned to survive ...

The right wing is still bat shiite crazy, but the time is not as favorable ... In the 90s and early 2000s, they could say whatever BS they could think of, and say they were better, with no real track record to prove otherwise ... Bushco has been SO freakin bad, SO freakin horrible, even the MSM can't hide that all the great "conservative principles" have to be taken with a grain of salt ...

Also ... Obama is A LOT tougher than people want to give him credit for, he responds quickly and decisively, he just doesn't have Hill's style, he goes to a higher place in responding ... The reason the right wing hates Hill and Bill so much is that they beat them at THEIR game, diseminating, lying, spinning ... Just because Obama doesn't play their game doesn't mean he isn't responding ...

Finally, one last point ... Among the shortcomings Gore and Kerry had as candidates, IMO, the biggest flaw from a public perception standpoint was that they were, for the lack of a better word, geeks ... Smart, intelligent, decent and dedicated men, no doubt ... But, the MSM was easily able to spin the characture that the right wing demanded - Arrogant or whatever, which is a big boys way of saying they were geeky, while Smirk was one of them there cool guys ...

Obama has a lot more personality, too much to get the geek label ...

Bottom line, in this environment, with people open to hearing a message about "change" he simply is the best candidate ...

[LakeSamish706]

2. Well in response, some Dems may want to be what you described but not...

this Dem.... If it takes cheating to win, count me out cause not interested in that. The things that you describe sink right to the level of Republicans, and I for one am not going there.

[HardWorkingDem]

7. Why is that so many DUers all ways jump to conclusions without asking first?

Go back and re-read my post and please point out where is suggest Dems "cheat" or act like Republicans or more ruthless politicians?

You won't be able to do so because I'm not suggesting that. What I am suggesting and pointing out is that so many Dems get hoodwinked time and time again and it's time to stop allowing this to happen.

It's like so many Dems drop their guard, get whacked and then while whining about it to the ref, get whacked again.

Again, look at HRC and Michigan and Florida. Perfect examples of ruthlessness and looking ahead to the next step. Yes, hindsight is 20-20, but if Obama had left his name on the Michigan ballot, or got it there, then Michigan might be a moot point. Florida is a little trickier, but now he could use HRC's practice of flying down to Florida for "campaign purposes" against her to show she says one thing and does another.

Basically all I'm stating, and please forgive the masculine example - we are in a fight and know the Rethuglicans are not beneath kicking in the nuts, for at the least, let's all put on some damn protection!

[LakeSamish706]

17. And one of the problems that I have with Hillary is this....

Hillary is all about me, me, me and I, I, I whereas Obama is about we, we, we and us, us, us.... There is the big difference between the two candidates IMO... Now the me,me,me and I,I, I are also traits that Republicans in general seem to display much more than most Democrats.

[izquierdista]

3. Unfortunately, true

But the problem is that you end up with people winning who are exactly the opposite of the ones you want in office. HRC is chasing the office like a dog chasing a car; neither would know what to do if they captured their prize. Already flubbed up her big chance at national health care once; what more disappointments lie in store if she is elected?

"The only club I would belong to is one that wouldn't have me for a member" -- Groucho Marx

[nxylas]

4. I wouldn't mind Dems being more ruthless against Republicans

It's Dem-on-Dem ruthlessness that I object to, at least at the level that the Clinton campaign has taken it to. Nobody gets to the top with their hands entirely clean, and Obama's no angel either, but he at least seems to know the difference between a primary campaign and a GE campaign.

[HardWorkingDem]

11. And what is sad is....

while he's acting the prince, he's getting sullied and battered.

One thing I've learned about politics in war time or hard times is that if the populace you are trying to win over sees you failing to fight for yourself, then slowly it starts to realize if you won't fight for yourself, then you probably won't put up much of a harder fight for them.

...see John Kerry for illustration.

[txaslftist]

5. She had to learn ruthlessness to avoid all those snipers...

[stellanoir]

6. Please consider reading this

"Fighting Fire with Water"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/23/152359/094/335/482758

snip

"I know you. You've worked your heart out for the last eight years, and what have you got? One loss after another. More troops. Higher gas prices. Less affordable healthcare. More Bush. Sure you've had some victories along the way, but still you've become defeated. After Kerry's loss in 04' you went through the normal stages of grief - anger, denial, misery, etc. You battled with your friends about the best way to move forward. Some said that 'to beat'em we gotta play their game... you know, get dirty, play nasty.' But, for some reason - despite all of your failures - in the back of your mind, you still held an ounce of hope that one day a true progressive thinker would rise up and represent a real shift from the past. Not more of the same failed moderate policies, same failed dumbed-down rhetoric, and same failed negative campaign styles, but something totally different. In your heart of hearts, you still found a way to believe that you didn't have to act like a republican to beat a republican.

I know you. You're pissed off right now. You hate Hillary Clinton. You think she's painting an ugly picture of a beautiful person. You hate her because she voted for the war and helped to create lousy trade agreements, which have taken jobs away from your uncles in Pittsburgh and water from your pen-pals in Accra. You hate her for her ridiculous claims of plagiarism, Rovian politics, and race-bating. But more than anything, you hate yourself for allowing our party to continue to prop up those who represent the moderate acceptance of the past, and not the smart, passionate, progressiveness you vowed to fight for when you were just a bit younger.

I know you. You're a Democrat. You believe in the endless possibilities of tomorrow and not the failures of yesterday. And truth be known, you don't really hate Hillary Clinton. After all, you know that if she somehow manages to win the nomination, you'll probably buckle after the first debate and volunteer for her before Labor Day. But what you really hate is losing. You're tired of never voting for the winner. You're tired of living through embarrassing and deadly wars, and not being able to stop them. And you're tired of the media deciding what wars we fight, and who commands those wars. You're tired of the divisions of race and gender and wealth and justice and nearly everything in between and beyond. And yes, perhaps most frustrating of all, you're tired of nobody seeming to care that you keep losing.

I know you. You're me, and I'm here to tell you that this time it's different. This time we're going to fight fire, not with more fire, but with water. We're going to be smart, loving, strong, and honest. We're not going to let the Hannity's and Buchanan's perpetuate ignorance and lies. We're going to shake our heads, smile, and call our uncle's in Pennsylvania, and remind them what is important in the world: their daughter's education, their father's well-being, and their cousin's safety. We're going to win this election and then we're going to win the rights and justices we deserve.

I know you. You're me, and we're going to change this world together."

[Armstead]

15. I love that -- Fight fire with water

That's exactly what we should be doing.

When you fight fire with fire, all you get is more fire.

The way to replace the politics of stalemates and division is t0 actually offer an alternative that is more powerful. Like a politics that people can rally behind for positive reasons.

[stellanoir]

21. Yup truly

wottaconcept.

Fire symbolizes spiritedness though can overamp.

Water symbolizes emotional nurture which is really often construed as weakness but upon which we only can thrive.

I loved that article also.

[jgraz]

9. Don't kid yourself. Obama's plenty ruthless

Those Michigan and Florida revotes didn't just collapse on their own.

The difference is that Obama is much better at hiding his ruthlessness than the Clintons are. He gives off that "bunny in front of a snowplow" vibe, but somehow everything ends up working out in his favor.

[samdogmom]

10. Ummm....so far not so good for Hillary. Her ruthlessness is backfiring...

So what is your point again????


Guess what, many of us want clean, fair, and honest campaigns! McCain (for the most part but he's better than Hillary) and Hillary still haven't grasped this huge shift in the electorate!

Karl Rove and his tactics are so yesterday! Give me a break!

Move on please!

[HardWorkingDem]

13. Right, then explain me this...

If we Dems are so election wise, then how did experienced campaigners fall for what Michigan and Florida now have become?

Someone wiser than myself or the general populace should have foreseen the problem of a candidate leaving their name off a ballot when another candidate left theirs on.

And it's just not HRC's ruthlessness I'm talking about - it's all of it. But if you advocate Dems getting whacked again and again while trying to remain oblivious to the true world......

And think of it.....4,000 dead, thousands more injured proves that dirty campaigns and Rove tactics are not "so yesterday" and still remain.

One tactic to avoid this is inoculation, not burying one's head in the sand. Our opponents are dirty nasty people and we best realize this and not forget it. (And I'm not claiming this of the HRC campaign - but to our real opponents).

[samdogmom]

18. "WE" did not "FALL" for the MI/FL debacle...just Hillary and her minions did!

Fair is fair--in MI every major candidate removed their name from the ballot EXCEPT Hillary. What was her point again?

In Florida--once on the ballot, it was very tough to get off the ballot. But with no campaigning allowed--name recognition ruled the day.

Please face the facts--if you are still supporting HRC--you are supporting an antiquated way of campaigning that is quickly earning the disgust of the nation.

[HardWorkingDem]

26. ? No, HRC and her people we're "smarter" about MI and FLA - that's my point...

MI and FL exactly show how ruthless and cunning the HRC has been and how their actions there hoodwinked the rest of the Dem candidates - like I stated - hindsight is 20/20, but I'm not a professional campaign person. My point is, a professional campaign strategist and cunning one at that should have said to Obama - "Listen, we need to get your name on the Michigan ballot and leave it there because if everyone else drops their name, then that person could make the argument he or she "won" that state and the delegates should be seated."

Of course the best option with most integrity involved would have been for ALL dems to remove their names from the ballots.

Because now the Dems do have an issue with the delegates of MI and Fla.

Hope that clears my point up.

[MindMatter]

12. In a way, I can admire Lee Atwater / Karl Rove

They were ruthless, unprincipled, totally in the game, quick to pounce, and prepared.

Clinton is only 1 for 5 on the Rove scale. She has the unprincipled thing down pat. Her preparation for and throughout this campaign has been abysmal. For a person who tried to make the campaign about being ready on day one, she proved time and again that she wasn't ready. The messages were all over the lot. She wasn't prepared to Iowa and she didn't get prepared for Texas. The strategy changed daily. The Kosovo thing was a monumental blunder. She voiced at least 4 different strategies/arguments about FL and MI. In short, it was a terribly run campaign. Not ruthless, just bitter and inept, and tinged with an obnoxious attitude of entitlement.

I guess the good news in all of this is: Hillary, you are no Karl Rove.

[dkf]

14. All the monsters in our history had a ton of Ruthlessness.

The fact that you can even tout this repulses me.

[senseandsensibility]

16. I want to see that ruthlessness aimed at McCain

It hasn't been, won't be, and that's why I don't like Hillary's tactics.

[Armstead]

19. I would say we should learn "smart toughness" instead

There's a difference between ruthlessness and smart toughness.

Hillary's brand of ruthlessness -- which was to at first go along with the effect of the rukes on the Fl/Michigan and then shift her stance and inflame the problem -- is ultimatrely self-defeating and politically self-destructive.

Smart toughness, IMO, would have been for her to openly stand for the principles she now claims to espouse back when it mattered. If she really cared about the "rights" of those voters, she should have stood up for them publicly and firmly when it might have made a difference and there was a possibility of avoiding this trainwreck.

Even if she could not have changed the outcome of that controversy, she would have at least lost it in a way that could be respected. But instead her "ruthless opportunism" has made a bad situation much worse. And it has added to the opposition and cynicism of her critics.

[Levgreee]

20. Obama defends himself. Doesn't mean he has to be immoral, to lie, to "fight hard"

[backscatter712]

22. No, Obama taught the opposite.

He proved that it is possible to run a campaign with honor and integrity, and win. You don't have to be Machiavellian to get a leg up, and in fact the people are sick and tired of Rovian sewer politics.

[Cha]

23. hilary's a ruthless sniper fighter alright and a

god damn liar. No thanks.

[Skidmore]

25. Ruthless is what got the nation to where it is right now.

[Drachasor]

27. Ruthlessness tears the country apart; that's the last thing we need.

[cooolandrew]

28. Are these traits we want in the WH torepair an economy??

[samdogmom]

29. Ummm....until I die I'll always be "surprised" by ruthlessness.....

because it's not the way I want to see campaigns operated. (It's not the way I would operate!)

Bottom line, I'm glad that at least once in my ADULT lifetime I got to see a non-ruthless campaign up close and personal! I truly admire Barack Obama for running a respectable campaign.

I don't mean to diss any honest campaigns in the past--it's just that I can't remember any since I came of age to vote (I was eligible to vote in the 1976 national election--this was my first time!) Unfortunately--I don't remember if 1976 was clean or dirty--although I would think Jimmy Carter was pretty clean--I was more focused on results at that point than tactics. In the years after 1976--I've seen every dirty trick imaginable played upon honest candidates and I've grown very wise and disillusioned. I would love it if the 2008 election was able to return things to a bit of "innocence and honor". I know this isn't possible--but it's a dream I have!