TNR BLOGS

January 08, 2009 | 8:20 PM
January 08, 2009 | 8:00 PM
January 08, 2009 | 6:03 PM

January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:13 PM
January 07, 2009 | 9:41 AM

January 08, 2009 | 6:31 PM
January 08, 2009 | 4:13 PM
January 08, 2009 | 2:50 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

January 08, 2009 | 5:12 PM
January 08, 2009 | 3:25 PM
January 08, 2009 | 1:16 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
13.02.2008
Everyone Hates Hillary

Well, not everyone. But Ron Fournier (via TPM) provides a thorough accounting of all the super-delegates who have various bones to pick with the Clintons:

Some are labor leaders still angry that Bill Clinton championed the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his centrist agenda.

Some are social activists who lobbied unsuccessfully to get him to veto welfare reform legislation, a talking point for his 1996 re-election campaign.

Some served in Congress when the Clintons dismissed their advice on health care reform in 1993. Some called her a bully at the time.

Some are DNC members who saw the party committee weakened under the Clintons and watched President Bush use the White House to build up the Republican National Committee.

Some are senators who had to defend Clinton for lying to the country about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Some are allies of former Vice President Al Gore who still believe the Lewinsky scandal cost him the presidency in 2000. 

Some are House members (or former House members) who still blame Clinton for Republicans seizing control of the House in 1994.
 
Some are donors who paid for the Clintons' campaigns and his presidential library. 

Some are folks who owe the Clintons a favor but still feel betrayed or taken for granted. Could that be why Bill Richardson, a former U.N. secretary and energy secretary in the Clinton administration, refused to endorse her even after an angry call from the former president? "What," Bill Clinton reportedly asked Richardson, "isn't two Cabinet posts enough?"

And some just want something new. They appreciate the fact that Clinton was a successful president and his wife was an able partner, but they never loved the couple as much as they feared them.

Of course, Noam noted this phenomenon a few weeks ago in his piece on the Democratic establishment's ill will toward the Clintons. (And Mike detected some of the Clintonites' haughty attitude toward Richardson in this Stump post.) But I hadn't realized the animosity was this deep. When Obama talks about turning the page, he's clearly not just talking to rank-and-file voters.

--Jason Zengerle 

Posted: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:08 AM with 14 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

twalker said:

Hang on, Obama's going to undo NAFTA and welfare reform?

February 13, 2008 11:36 AM

adamvaught said:

Am I the only one who has four Toyota Tundra ads in this middle of this post?

February 13, 2008 11:38 AM

bcbaird said:

adamvaught:

Might be time for a spyware scan?

February 13, 2008 12:08 PM

CharlesFosterKane said:

I'm not in the habit of being a Clinton defender, but isn't a bit of a stretch to resent HILLARY for the Monica Lewinsky scandal?

February 13, 2008 12:27 PM

virginiacentrist said:

charlesfosterkane:

Yeah it's a stetch. Then again - Al Gore probably lost in 2000 because of it. And if he didn't lose because of it, he was unquestionably damaged by it. Meanwhile, it's actually a popular belief amongst political hacks that Hillary's Senate race would not have been possible without the bump in her favorables (from like 30 to 75) caused by the sympathy generated by the Lewinsky matter.

twalker:

No - but it's an important point to consider since Hillary is running on "35 years of experience (minus everything that you don't like, according to today's latest polling data on that stuff)"

February 13, 2008 1:13 PM

virginiacentrist said:

Many Democrats saw the Clintons as the only survivors of that scandal. The overreaching tactics used by the Right increased Bill's job performance ratings. The sympathy generated by the events perpetrated by Bill increased Hillary's favorability ratings. And the rest of the party wallowed in the toilet created by Bill and Noted Reappearing Fungus Terry MacAulliffe.  They didn't recover until 2005.

So yeah. There's bitterness. It's a bit more complicated than "Hillary should have pleased her man, if you know what I mean [wink wink, nudge nudge]".

February 13, 2008 1:16 PM

stgla said:

CFK, you're right.  Most of that mud deserves to be thrown at Bill but sticks to Hillary.  She has gotten the shaft from Bill and I really mean that figuratively.  If she had married a realtor or a propane salesman I bet she'd have been MORE successful in politics.  She's a smart cookie and I feel bad for her.

February 13, 2008 1:28 PM

teplukhin2you said:

whoa! Do we really want all of these people's enthusiastic support? Is Obama going hard left now? Not a good way to defeat a moderate, centrist GOP opponent, methinks....

February 13, 2008 2:00 PM

twalker said:

What tep said - "social activists" opposing decade-old welfare reform laws or labor leaders "still angry" about NAFTA are not groups that should be on anyone's pander list.

February 13, 2008 2:20 PM

Annabella2 said:

She can't have it both ways... the 35 years of experience because she married Bill and walk away from the chaos that would be back, that an awful lot of people don't want...

They've always run as a Twosome or presented themselves that way... that means we get Bill back, we get a Dynastic Restoration... so many of us do indeed want to "turn the page" on all that.

I for one spent untold effort and passion defending him in what I still believe to have been an outrageous impeachment.. but that doesn't make me any less resentful for having had to do that and for having any progress in the 2nd term go down in flames because of that.  Yes Clinton was often effective and both NAFTA and Welfare reform and deficit controls were very necessary and valuable things to have done... BUT what got done in the 2nd term.  Nix. Nada.  Niente... and when he tried to defend the US with bomb strikes on terrorist facilities it was Hey It's Wag the Dog... supposedly a distraction from his Monika Lewinsky problems...

Is that Hillary's fault?  Probably not.  But it does mean that they'll both be back in the White House with all the nastiness and mendacity  and misinformation they showed in So. Ca.  Spare us.  Please spare us.  

Can't we have the first woman president be a woman who has made it on her own and with all the Cintons's (plural and dual) baggage?

February 13, 2008 3:04 PM

butchie b said:

L&G, in his speech at UW last night, BHO specifically referred to NAFTA in a pejorative fashion (I can't remember the quote, but I rolled my eyes when I heard it).  I know that the Dems are protectionist and getting more so (e.g., Sen. Sherrie Brown, D-Manufactuing jobs that ain't coming back), but if y'all want to run on increasing prices on everyday goods for everyone, have at it.

And likewise, if you want to reestablish welfare as an entitlement, by all means.  Do Dems have a death wish?  Seriously.

February 13, 2008 3:15 PM

twalker said:

From Obama's website (go to Issues, then Economy):

"Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers."

I have no idea what this actually means.

February 13, 2008 4:35 PM

psantillana said:

Likewise, I don't see how this is a source of animosity all by itself:

     Some are donors who paid for the Clintons' campaigns and his presidential library.  

But remember that these are people unhappy with the Clintons for their own various reasons. It doesn't mean that they like Obama, or that Obama would agree with them on everything. He would probably agree with people unhappy with mandatory minimums and 3 strikes rules, though.

I like to picture this as a figurative parade, with David Geffen in front, kind of skipping around in a court jester suit, strumming a mandolin and singing about liars.

February 13, 2008 7:30 PM

teplukhin2you said:

The problem with NAFTA are the loopholes that benefit *US agribusiness*, not Mexicans. It's destroying millions of jobs _in MEXICO_ and causing these poor desperate folks to head to El Norte just to feed their families. It was supposed to create jobs and raise incomes in Mexico. That's the problem with NAFTA.

And Obama's supposed to be a policy wonk? Really?

February 13, 2008 7:32 PM