Mark Penn Argues for a Third Bill Clinton Term

25.01.2008

I meant to weigh in on that Clinton conference call I mentioned yesterday but, between closing my print piece and the GOP debate, I never got a around to it... Anyway, nothing especially ground-breaking happened--it was mostly an implicit (and, during the Q&A portion, explicit) defense of their somewhat dubious radio ad pivoting off Obama's "party of ideas" comment about the GOP. (The ad ties him to all sorts of policies--tax breaks for Wall Street fat-cats, opposition to minimum wage increases--that he doesn't support.) The call involved Clintonites like former economic advisor Laura Tyson and former deputy chief of staff Steve Richetti talking about all the great ideas the Dems had in the '90s under Bill Clinton. When reporters asked about the leap from Obama's quote to tax cuts for the rich, communications director Howard Wolfson and strategist Mark Penn insisted the were merely using Obama's own words.

Amid all the back and forth, Penn did happen to utter something unintentionally interesting, though:

Obama has no record going back to that period [the 1990s], nothing like the strong economy, the record on the strong economy, that President Clinton has… Senator Clinton was first lady then, she understood the strategy employed… the ideas needed to turn the economy around from the Bush mess… We're entering another period like that [presumably the recession of the early 90s]. It's clear why the Obama campaign is trying to deploy this strategy to change people's view of past. Most Americans believe he [Bill Clinton] was a great president. They would have wanted him over the current occupant of the White House…

It's possible that Penn goes on like this all the time, and I just haven't been paying attention. But I've never heard a Clinton surrogate so explicitly compare Obama and Bill Clinton, as though he were the candidate, while giving such short shrift to Hillary. I mean, it was basically an argument for why Bill should have a third term while maybe Hillary could, you know, hang out or something. (She understood the strategy employed--that's the experience she's claiming? Hell, I understood the strategy employed and I was in high school in 1993.) Hard to see how this serves her well, even if Bill is as beloved as the campaign assumes.

Anyway, Penn's words, not mine...

P.S. It really does remind you of that Onion piece our commenters linked to a couple days ago.

--Noam Scheiber

Posted: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:35 PM with 15 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!

miceelf said:

Bill has always been a very big part of the rationale. Subtract him, and what have you got? A reasonably decent junior senator with all the charisma of a ripe eggplant.

(yes, Obama is also a decent junior senator, but in his case, there is some charisma)

January 25, 2008 3:02 PM

Bukharin said:

The 22 Amendment is anathema to the American ideal.

January 25, 2008 3:06 PM

Rhubarbs said:

I wouldn't vote for Bill Clinton today -- too much time has lapsed, and I'd fear that he'd be even rustier than Grover Cleveland was after only four years out of power -- but I would have voted for Bill enthusiastically in 2000 and 2004. Sigh.

January 25, 2008 3:33 PM

drdannyu said:

Obama has the charisma of a much more likeable vegetable. Like chard, or a nice radicchio.

January 25, 2008 3:56 PM

mschol17 said:

Mark Penn, feminist advocate.

January 25, 2008 4:00 PM

kgrant1054 said:

Does Bill inserting himself (yeesh, bad choice of words) into this campaign blunt Hillary's feminist credibility? How can she have it both ways?

January 25, 2008 4:26 PM

ramboorider said:

"Bill has always been a very big part of the rationale. Subtract him, and what have you got? A reasonably decent junior senator with all the charisma of a ripe eggplant."

What makes you think she would even be a junior senator with egplantian characteristics? Without Bill Clinton, she's whatever she'd have made of herSELF. Which might have been great or might have been terrible or might have been a junior senator, but neither she nor we will ever get the chance to find out. Its ALL about Bill Clinton.

-Ray

January 25, 2008 4:51 PM

ralphnelle said:

Has anyone else heard that HRC is trying to have Michigan's and Florida's delegates reinstated? Wow. She really is shameless.

January 25, 2008 5:03 PM

blackton said:

yeah, ralphnelle, I read about that too. It will only happen if she already has enough delegates to win the nomination, to suck up to Michigan and Florida, Not even she could be stupid enough to try to lay claim to them in a brokered convention, in such a case both Obamas and Edwards delegates would walk out in protest and that would be it for her. So even though I hate her too, I think you are mistaken about what it really means. If what you say is true though, then she is hopeless.

January 25, 2008 5:23 PM

williamyard said:

"They would have wanted him over the current occupant of the White House."

At the moment, most Americans would prefer a nice plump Fasciola hepatica (sheep liver fluke) over the current occupant of the White House.

January 25, 2008 5:36 PM

J.J. Gould said:

It's clear why

the Obama campaign is trying

to deploy this strategy

to change people's view of past

Most Americans believe Bill Clinton

was a great president

They would have wanted him over the current

occupant of the White House

January 25, 2008 11:25 PM

jobeek2 said:

Oh my, you people are really having a field day with this! :-D

January 26, 2008 2:05 AM

fwslusser said:

I'm still for Gore.

January 26, 2008 3:09 AM

basman said:

I don't for the life of me get the big geshrey here. Mark Penn said Americans liked Bill Clinton a lot as a president and would have wanted to, if they had such a choice, have for a third term over 43. What subtext, what gnomic context, esoteric hidden meanings am I missing, the magnitude of which are so earth shaking as to command all this analytical energy?

Politics the art of the possible: punditry the art of the lint picker.

January 26, 2008 4:22 PM

hayleykelse said:

Omigod, how dense are you anyway, Noam? Penn was speaking of the experience Hillary gained during her husband's presidency, which most Democrats consider to be successful, despite all the distractions. Denigrating Clinton's presidency detracts from the importance of that experience. He's not making a case for Bill Clinton to return to office. Must you look for Clinton conspiracies everywhere?

I'm not saying I buy his premise, but that's what he's saying.

January 26, 2008 7:00 PM