The media's Bill Clinton meme

[ProSense]

Steve Benen

<...>

It's a pretty fascinating piece about the former president's campaign efforts, which are considerable. By Election Day, Clinton will have appeared in more than 100 events from coast to coast.

Clinton's concerns strike me as pretty compelling. He thinks his party, for example, has been ineffective in fighting to defend its accomplishments, and I'm very much inclined to agree. The former president isn't satisfied with Democrats' messaging and communications strategies, and that strikes me as more than fair.

But there is a pertinent detail that the article largely overlooked. Bill Clinton is arguably the most naturally gifted politician most of us have ever seen, and long-time readers know that I make no secret of my fondness for him (I even interned in his White House in 1995). But for all of Clinton's considerable talents, in his first midterm cycle, his party's candidates ran away from him; he wasn't welcome in districts nationwide; his fellow Democrats allowed themselves to become "human pinatas"; and his party lost both the House and Senate.

I mention this because there's a subtext to articles like these: why can't Barack Obama play this game as well as Bill Clinton? The answer is: there's a problem with that question.

Josh Marshall had a good piece on this yesterday: "Being president is hard. Being president two years into your first term is hard. And being at the center of the polarizing political storm -- as Obama is today and Clinton was 16 years ago -- tends to wipe the political genius and midas touch and all the other good stuff right off of you. 10% unemployment doesn't make you look that good either. This isn't justifying any mistakes. But I'm surprised how short the memories are of many people who do this political analysis thing for a living."

The real story behind Clinton's campaigning is that Democrats are doing everything they can to win.

Biden nears 100-event tally on behalf of Democrats

This is a fight, it's not about who has the better message (Republicans have none and somehow that isn't working against them). It's a contrast between Democrats and the RW kooks, the greedy corporations and Republicans who do nothing but embrace/are kooks and shill for greedy corporations.

Mr. DEAN: I don't think we should be making the case right now. Elections are not the time to educate people. You win the election, then you educate people afterwards. But the president's doing what he should be doing. This is a bare-knuckle fight. It's between the far right, which has taken over the Republican Party, and the rest of us.

I'm pretty sure Dean understands that grassroots educating is necessary, but the notion that politicians are going to spend the few minutes they have at every campaign stop educating people via speeches is impractical.

[book_worm]

1. Bill has been thru the same thing in 1994 and like Obama and Biden and others

is trying his best to avoid a GOP congress which we had to endure for 12 long years.

[ProSense]

2. No other comments? n/t

[EC]

3. It maddens me to hear the pondits saying Obama needs

Clinton out there because he isn't welcome...that's not true, they are both out there hitting hard because they can cover more ground with 2 instead of 1 maga-star...They are both working it and both are welcome...and cheered...

[high density]

4. I saw Clinton at one of these events

I thought it was great to energize the local party.

Some Democrats are troubled that Clinton, who left office a decade ago, is a bigger draw than Obama and the party's current leaders. "Bill Clinton is not going to live forever, and it's time for the Democratic Party to develop other voices," said Bob Rucker, a journalism profressor, as he left a recent Clinton rally at San Jose State University.

WTF does that mean? He shouldn't be talking because he's getting older? Give me a break. Clinton's message is way better today than it was while he was in office and signing shit like NAFTA or dealing with the the Repukes trying to derail him.

[ProSense]

5. What does it mean? Consider

the title of the WaPo article: Former president Clinton on mission to rescue Democratic Party in fall elections

[karynnj]

7. The criticism in your excerpt is of Obama and other Democrats, not Clinton

It is saying - without backup - that he is a bigger draw than Obama - and then laments that this is troubling for the future because Clinton won't live forever. In fact, while Clinton is doing a very useful good job on the campaign trail, I don't think he is getting the huge crowds that Obama is getting.

That said - it doesn't matter who is drawing 30,000 people and who a smaller number in the the tens of thousands - it is better for the Democrats to have BOTH of them out there. In addition, there are people who might be swayed by Bill and not by Obama - just as the reverse is likely true. Together they reach and excite more Democrats to get out there. Unlike 2008, no one has to choose between them.

[Beacool]

11. Obama got the 30K plus crowds in friendly college campuses, nothing new there.

The only place where he has gone that was not friendly to him in the past is Nevada. What's surprising about Obama getting 35K in Oregon or a nice showing in Philadelphia? Biden and Bill are going where Obama is not particularly popular.

As for Bill, he has gone above and beyond what he was obligated to do as a Democratic ex president. It must have taken a lot of fortitude to campaign for Brown.

;-)

[karynnj]

12. Is this a kneejerk reaction in defense where no defense is needed?

I didn't criticize Bill Clinton - I said he did good. I also said there were some he could reach that Obama couldn't. You are buying into the media's theme that Democrats are standing their distance from Obama and that Bill Clinton is out there to save the day.

Clinton's actions are great, but you have to be completely naive to think there is nothing in it for him, but this is win/win for Clinton and the other Democrats. As to Brown, Brown is easily winning - even without the Clinton appearance. It is clear they don't like each other - and Clinton was no angel in all of this - as can be seen by the ad used, where it was entirely likely Clinton knew the charge was unfounded when he used it in the debate - carefully attributing it to the CNN story. (It was not typical that he cited sources of information.)

[Beacool]

13. It's a reaction to your perpetual dismissive tone when it comes to the Clintons.

Clinton is and was the better politician. Heck, he is still the best politician of his generation and the next one too for that matter.

:D

[ProSense]

14. Maybe it's the revisionist history, infatuation and arrogance of

all things Clinton.

As the OP points out, Clinton got stomped in the 1994 midterms. He's campaigning now, and that's a good thing, having all hands on deck. Let's not pretend that his efforts weren't clumsy and unsuccessful a couple of years ago.

The constant attempts to elevate Clinton to Obama's superior is downright condescending.

[Beacool]

16. Funny that you should choose the word "arrogance".

The one candidate and campaign that epitomized the term was not Clinton.

;-)

[ProSense]

17. I also chose the word "infatuation"

and it's becoming clear that there was some projecting.

[karynnj]

19. There is NOTHING dismissive in what I said of Clinton - reread it

As to best politician, many pundits have said so since 1992.

I think he is brilliant, very charismatic and in 1992, had the same ability Obama had to project an infectious optimism and sense of possibility. He, more so than Obama, won over a huge proportion of the moderate to liberal media and in 1992, they helped a huge amount in allowing him to overcome the various pieces of baggage that emerged all too regularly. Winning the hearts of the media is a major part of anyone being a great politician and he excelled in that.

His media support and his ability as a politician were what allowed him to win the nomination and then to narrowly win the Presidency, in spite of personal liabilities that would have sunk others. His record in Arkansas was not all that fantastic. Arkansas was near the bottom on nearly any metric - before he was in office and after he was in office. If you looked just at his accomplishments and his personal life, he was less impressive than most of his competitors. It was his political ability, including winning over his "cool kids" fans in the media that made him beat his primary opponents.

I still think Clinton and his team are all given way too much credit for winning the 1992 race. GHWB was at 33% approval near the election! The media was entirely positive on Clinton in the last month, while repeating GHWB vomiting far more often than needed. Yet, we are told Carville and Begala were the best campaign team ever and Clinton, the most talented politician of his generation. All for a campaign where at one point, he was 3 out of 3. The fact is that like 2008, who ever won the primary was the overwhelming favorite to win the Presidency. Where his political ability showed was in winning that primary. I think Obama was at least as good a politician - facing far stiffer competition in his primary and pulling off an upset. Unless you put Obama in another generation by splitting the baby boom generation, I disagree that Bill Clinton is the best politician.

While I think Clinton excels at being charismatic and winning allies in the media, he is less good at two other elements of being a politician. His track record is more complex than just being the charismatic candidate of 1992. You might want to look back at 2008 and consider whether he was a net positive or negative on Hillary's campaign. I completely believe that he would not intentionally undercut his wife, but there were things he did that did just this. (A clear example - excusing the sniper fire story she included in prepared remarks 4 times as resulting from her being old and tired. Just what a candidate would want to hear.) This reflects another part of being a good politician - being disciplined - and here he is not good at all. Another part is strategy, and while he is good here, he did not see the danger in the putting ll the eggs in one basket strategy that HRC had in 2008. Had the campaign given serious thought to HRC not having a blow out win on Super Tuesday she would have won.

[Beacool]

21. And you really see nothing dismissive in what you wrote?

You just repeated it in a more expansive manner.

Regardless, you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.

:shrug:

[AndrewP]

20. It was amazing to see Clinton campaign for Brown

He probably still wants to strangle him. LOL

Good to see President Clinton out there fighting the good fight.

[Beacool]

22. Yeah, particularly after what Brown said about Bill recently.

Bill wasn't obligated to campaign for Brown, but he did.

:)

[rufus dog]

6. And Bush is where?

Where the fuck is George, is George a fucking negative to his party?

It is all the same media bullshit, rip the hell out of the Dem, claim the Dem isn't liked, ignore facts.

[GoCubsGo]

10. And, that is the crux of it all.

Bill Clinton reminds people of better times, and they don't like that. Idiot Boy reminds them of who made the mess we're in. They don't like that people are being reminded that they had it so much better when Democrats were in charge. I imagine it really galls them that the Big Dog is still so popular after all they did to try to destroy him. The same goes for Obama, since they're trying to do to him as they did to Clinton.

[AtomicKitten]

8. I appreciate BClinton's efforts to GOTV.

However, the implication of this article is that BClinton is a bigger draw than Pres Obama and that is the basis for the claim that he is "saving" the party.

I think the attendance figures beg to differ and this implication just another attempt to revive and re-litigate the Obama vs. Clinton meme that is a disservice to the party particularly days before an election.

I think the point is that Democrats are putting on their game face for the midterms. Pres Obama is breaking a sweat campaigning. Joe B is tearing it up on the campaign trail. Even Michelle Obama is stepping into the fray. I appreciate all help in the endeavor.

:kick:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. I Think The Media Is Setting Up Bill Clinton To Fail

Some of it is intentional and some of it is unintentional. If the Republicans do well they will suggest that Bill Clinton's endorsement was not determinative.

I am not a big fan of the efficacy of endorsements. I don't think somebody votes for a candidate because someone popular tells them to.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. The Media suck and they want Dems to fail period

Saudi-owned corporations

[angee_is_mad]

18. clinton is campaigning w/bluedogs and dinos

who progressives are always shouting should be primaried. Those dinos tend to be in the south in rural (white) areas that didn't vote for Obama and probably never would. I have my own suspicions on the reason but will leave it at that.
Of course he campaigned for Kendrick Meek, because he OWES Meek for sticking with hillary til the bitter end.
Just another BS article to attempt to make Obama look ineffective and irrelevant. Noticed how they down play the crowds Obama is drawing at his rallies.