2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumShadow of 2008
Last edited Fri Sep 7, 2012, 07:00 AM - Edit history (1)
I think we all appreciate Bill's oratorical tour de force of last night. And I would echo all the plaudits that I've read here and elsewhere in DU. Yet there is something about the 2008 primary that hangs over everything like Banquo's ghost. Anyone who frequented the DU forums in those days can testify to the absolute savaging dished out to his wife (I can recall expressions like 'trash' being used). Dig up the archives if you don't believe me. Even Romney, a Republican and the opposing GE candidate, is getting a generally softer ride now from forum participants than did Hillary, a Democrat, in those days.
How many of those now gushing praise for Bill in 2012 participated in the demolition of Hillary in 2008?
Sorry if I appear to be introducing a note of dissension but I feel this question has to be asked.
liberalmuse
(18,672 posts)Period.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Do we really need to rehash it. AGAIN?!
Response to bunnies (Reply #2)
Post removed
DemocratsForProgress
(545 posts)And by whom?
anamnua
(1,111 posts)Caucus fraud.
The disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida.
DNC bias
MSM bias.
The use of the race card to smear the Clintons.
I see posters here with 5,000+ postings to their name -- this means , in all probability they were around during the period I am talking about.
Bill was also caught up in the general anti-Clinton hysteria of the time: 'he lost us control of congress', 'he lost us the 2000 election', 'the Clintons are corporate golddiggers' etc.
I logged on night after night, week after week, month after month during that time. The sustained anti-Hillary venom is not something that will disappear from my mind in 40 years let alone 4.
What turns my stomach is the realization that many of those signing their praises now tore them to shreds in '08.
DemocratsForProgress
(545 posts)the first two words of your response are so ridiculous I just cannot take your opinion seriously. The next six words are almost as silly, and it certainly doesn't get any more worthwhile subsequently. Not buying any of it.
quaker bill
(8,224 posts)She was simply defeated. The rules were the rules. They were available to all the candidates and states going in. It is up to the candidates and their campaigns to determine how to use the process to their best advantage.
A good campaign uses the media to their advantage.
These battles are fought for all the marbles, it is not meant to be "fair". Nothing one dem might do to win over another will be off the table when facing the repug on Nov.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)Clinton's endorsement last night and the reaction to it pretty much proves that it's all water under the bridge. Why dwell on negatives when there's so much positive in the air?
FrenchieCat
(68,867 posts)and if so, I believe that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama answered it long ago....
They both apparently love this country and know how to rise above political campaigns.
Perhaps you should try some of that!
anamnua
(1,111 posts)It is a question specifically directed at those who have something to answer for.
FrenchieCat
(68,867 posts)Well excuse the fuck out of me!
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)You need more important things to worry about.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)I believe our SOS is doing just fine.