How much aid might John McCain's increasingly tough shots at Obama offer Hillary?* She has already

Speaking solely in terms of style, ever since McCain-Feingold, I've sort of come to expect candidates to speak in their own voices in campaign ads. Unless it's a dramatic humor spot with actors and whatnot, the moment I hear generic-announcer-voice I just assume an ad is either a false attack, an "independent" ad, or both. The little "I'm Candidate X and I approved this ad" bit at the end just makes me ask, "Then why were you afraid to speak the ad in your own voice?"

It's stylistically jarring for Hillary to use a stand-in announcer here, given that the whole point is to paint Obama as afraid to speak to the public.

I don't mean this as any substantive knock on Hillary, just a general comment on style and presentation. I think this particular line of attack would be more effective if we heard it from Hillary herself -- or even better, a Wellstone '90 style of presentation, with Hillary at a podium waiting for Obama to show up, explaining her positions, and issuing a lighthearted challenge. "I'm ready when you are, Barack."

This is considered going negative?  Of course Obama didnt go negative with his constant attacks on the Clinton presidency?  Or in his unfair and wrong distortion that Clinton "lost" the Congress, without pointing out that this was because courageous Dem senators voted with Clinton on the Brady Bill and on his superb budget and paid the ultimate price?  Why are you all so protective of Obama?  He should have nothing to fear from more debates.  The people deserve them.  Refusing to debate is not indicative of a new politics, or a politics of inclusiveness, its the same old same old from a front runner.  Hillary was a front runner once also, and she had no fear of debates.  It would be nice for Obama to show the same courage.

You can cont me as a proud baby boomer, a veteran of the useful and necessary political wars of the 60's through the 90's, and a person who liked the Clinton administration, who does not feel at all included in the Obama unity thing, but who feels excluded, insulted, pushed to the side, and angry about it.

LOL. I love this ad.

There is nothing that screams "My campaign is being run by a 24 year old fresh off a House of Delegates Race!" than the "He's ducking the debates!" charge.

A question that is as fitting here as any, as we discuss the doings of Wisconsin.   Is there any chance that the hero of many a Wisconsin Democrats, Russ Feingold, will endorse one of the candidates prior to the primary next week?  If so, would this make any difference?  

I, for one, pined openly for a Feingold Presidential run.  *Sigh*

Mayhap Feingold for AG?  We can dream, can't we?  That, or if we are feeling snarky, Feingold for head of Homeland Security?  I love it, somebody needs to make this happen.

jmrugo,

Just a question: When have you heard Obama make "constant" attacks on the Clinton presidency? I've heard him speak at least a dozen times this year. Other than that interview where he pointed out that Reagan changed the course of American politics more than Clinton did, which by the way is a factually true statement, I haven't heard a single "attack" on the Clinton presidency.

I have heard Hillary's surrogates _claim_ that Obama attacks the Clinton administration, but I haven't actually heard Obama say any such thing.

I ask as an Obama supporter who actually has a bust of Bill Clinton on my desk.

Jmrugo:

This is the first negative TV ad of the primary (to my knowledge). That's significant. It's one thing to send mail pieces that go directly into the trash. It's another thing to flood our airwaves with really weak negative attacks.

No no- I think he should debate her.   I liked the one-on-one debate a lot.   I think this is a smart move by Team Hillary.   It does make Obama look bad, even if he has solid reasons for not debating.  

jmrugo, why do you feel pushed aside?  Honestly curious here.   I haven't heard that before.

this might be a good argument... if they hadn't debated what is it 18 times already?

I think if the Obama team is really smart, they'll email this piece out to every supporter they have.  

"Dear Obama Supporters:  We knew that Hillary and the Clinton Machine would continue their slash-and-burn, win-at-all-costs style of campaigning.  But even we didn't think that they would stoop as low as to broadcast negative TV ads against A FELLOW DEMOCRAT!"

or something of that nature.

Could make them a fortune, and help to continue to paint Hillary as that 'old type of politics'

just my 2 cents.

maxblum: Exactly.  Go on YouTube, for crying out loud.

Everyone's assuming she wants more debates because she out-performs Obama in debates.  I think that's arguable.  I think she wants more debates because free TV time is the only kind she can afford now.  I wonder how big that ad buy (in Wisconsin!) is.

I give the ad credit, though, for making an intellectually defensible point -- unlike everything that comes out of Mark Penn's mouth.

Does anyone remember the old episode of the Simpsons in which Bill Clinton appears at the end and says to Lisa, "if at first you don't succeed, complain and complain until you do--it's the American way."

The Obama people should pay for the rights to that clip and use it!

This ad needs more cowbell.

ralphnelle,

Not to mention the "Family Guy" episode where Bill seduces Lois and, when Peter shows up to complain, seduces Peter...

Obama should just ask Hillary if they can both take the night off that would be used for the debate and instead spend it at home with their families. His daughters can't campaign with him, and I am sure he misses them, so it could be a sincere request. Then let Hillary say no, that we need another debate again, and that saying the same thing for the thousandth time is more important than spending a night with his family.

"Two senior Clinton advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the race candidly, said the campaign feels the New...

Rhubarbs

Uh ... where did you get a desk sized bust of Bill Clinton? If it doubles as a humidor I want one.

arson, it's funny you say that, because it's actually a 1993 inaugural souvenir I picked up at -- wait for it! -- a tobacconist's shop in Georgetown. It was like fifteen bucks, which was real money back in college, and made of crumbly plaster in a toga-ed Roman motif. But a good likeness, and signed by the local artist George Carr.

Most of the nose has broken off, as has some of the pediment, but that only adds to the faux-antique charm. Most people assume I display the bust as ironic kitsch, but the truth is I think very highly of President Clinton. Best president of my lifetime, though when your lifetime starts in the Nixon administration, that's setting the bar pretty low.

Obama has said that debates - particularly the day of preparing for them - eat up time when he could be talking to voters and answering their questions [instead of stupid ones from the most pompus team in news].  Somebody had a great idea of a debate where they only ask and answer each other questions - a real debate, in other words. That would be fantastic, but it's not going to happen.

And I also think she needs the free air time, yes.

Boneill -

You asked Jmrugo why (s)he felt "pushed aside" as a "proud baby boomer, a veteran of the useful and necessary political wars of the 60's through the 90's". Said you hadnt heard that before.

I have heard that sentiment expressed, by this one poster on a forum I post on (Hey, jmrugo, are you Lola? ;) ). I'll quote what she wrote at the time:

----------

"There's another reason why I focus on the generational. Obama has spoken about going back to the 90s, that we have to move forward, that the politics of the 60s are over. That way of talking sounds like he's suggesting that there's nothing good to learn or use from the politics of the 60s. If he doesn't mean that, he needs to clarify it as soon as possible because a large number of people are hearing it that way.

I agree that there are some political practices that we can learn from because they don't work or cause ethical problems. However, there is an issue of another form of discrimination, that's agism. Those of us who took part in the politics of the 60s surely made some mistakes, but it's an insensitive over statement to dismiss those practices without qualifying what he means. Maybe he has qualified it. If he has, it hasn't made it into the media well enough to counteract that perception.

This idea I've heard put forward on TV press that this is presenting a conflict in that we have to choose between supporting our daughters or our mothers of even grand mothers is wrong. Hillary and those of us who were very young in the 60s are baby boomers. It's actually a conflict between our daughters/sons and ourselves. Hillary in many ways represents me. I and many of us have strongly identified with her. She's been our spokes person for some time now. It's a mistake to disregard that fact."

----------

A day earlier, she also wrote:

"As I've said before, it's offensive to me........and I'd like to get some open minded consideration of this.....to be dismissed as obsolete. Many of us in my generation have worked very hard, taken the bumps and bruises that come along with that hard work and the learning required to keep going after some of our idealistic plans failed. And here we are, at the height of our lives finally at a point where we're in a position to accomplish some of our greatest goals. If you think we're going to sit down and let that opportunity be taken from us by our own children before their time, you are mistaken. I'm delighted they're finally stepping up to take their place in political life. It's time. And I love them for their efforts.

But I and many people of my generation have worked all our lives to elect a woman to the White House. And not just any ole woman, but one who is capable and respectable enough to deserve it, one who shares our democratic values and will succeed in accomplishing many of the changes we've held dear. We've waited for eight years until the time was right. And we're not going to give up without spending a lot of money and fighting like hell. And as I've pointed out, there are more of us baby boomer Democrats who are still strong than there are of the younger generations. Don't you worry about the money. We'll provide it.

Obama can work for it just like Hillary and the rest of us have done. He has plenty of time to accomplish his goals, especially after he's learned a few lessons. Then I'll be delighted to vote and hopefully elect an African American of his caliber to be president."

----------

I wont comment on this... I'm just passing it on in order to perhaps shed some light on the kind of sentiment Jmrugo may be talking about. Even if this isnt what Jmrugo was talking about, it might provide a useful peek into the feelings involved in some of the support for Hillary.

sorry jobeek, but that is all self-entitled nonsense. The Clintons were in the White House for 8 years. And the next baby boomer Bush has been in for another 8, just how long do boomers think they are entitled to have what they want.

Jmrugo, you are obsolete, you and your generation has fucked over America, and before you take credit for Civil rights, it wasn't the baby boomers who won that fight. MLK was born a decade and a half before. You will be delighted to vote for Obama? When? In 8 years, well honey you might not be alive then.

And what are your greatest goals? To keep power for another 8 years! You baby boomers have been the worst generation in American history, just go away, you offend me with your arrogance and elitism. Obama is 46 years old you freaking twit, he is not 10, stop treating him like he is.