MyDD :: Clinton and McCain

Clinton and McCain

by aiko, Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:33:47 PM EST

Yes. I was crushed. I believed in the polls, and in the poll analysis here and on open left. C'est la vie.

I turned the TV off the minute Terry Mcauliffe showed his face on MSNBC. I couldn't take it. The thought of the Clinton machine fighting back and winning was uncomfortable enough but to have to sit there and listen to the Clinton surrogates was just too much to bear.

I can't stand them--the Clinton talking heads. For once, I agree with kos. To find them all back in my living room, on my computer screen and in my newspapers --and to imagine that it might be like this for eight more years--is a tough pill to swallow. My uneasiness with Clinton is all about the past. I have never been able to get past the Monica thing and all the damage it did to the dem party. The Clinton machine is not very good at apologizing. But they are good at spinning excuses.

This morning watching the news I see two smiling faces: Clinton and McCain. Can you imagine the general election if these two are our candidates? Two aging political pros. Both white, grey and wrinkled. Both tough, charming and experienced. One would have to be elected. Then we have a president. Simple as that.

It is depressing to think that this is what our country wants. One of two old time political pros. Both represent the status quo. Both have deep roots in the Washington establishment. And both lead to more of the same.

There they are side by side: Clinton and McCain. Not my dream team to say the least.

Is this what we have to look forward to?

Tags: obama, clinton, 2008, edwards (all tags)

Permalink :: 40 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

Plop down some money, get off the blogs, pick up the phone or get out into the street. Roll up your sleeves. There's work to be done.

by Piuma on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:37:11 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Why? Clinton is a good person. She has done a lot for the Democratic causes. As for McCain, I don't like his policies, but he seems like least unhinged of all the Republican candidates.

by moi moi on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:39:23 PM EST

Clinton: Corporate Americas candidate (none / 0)

Clinton appeared on the cover of Fortune Magazine last Summer declaring she was Corporate America's candidate and then proceeded to collect lots of money from the lobbyists. That is what is wrong with Clinton

Listening comes first

by Moonwood on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:20:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton: Corporate Americas candidate (2.00 / 1)

I wish you all could at least come up with some new juvenile hysteria. This old stuff is just not fun anymore.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:54:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton: Corporate Americas candidate (none / 0)

If Hillary wins the Democratic Party loses the presidency. Her negatives are too high.

Listening comes first

by Moonwood on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 10:38:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton: Corporate Americas candidate (none / 0)

and if she wins the nomination, what does it say about the Democrats in America?

The Democratic Party doesn't live or die with the Clintons

by nrafter530 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:16:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Yeah, that would be a great match-up. I hope it pans out.

Obama-Clinton: The New Glory of America

by Zeitgeist9000 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:42:43 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

This is real life. There are real issues and they effect real people. You get to be President by doing things. By gaining experience. Not by be allowed 5 minutes to give a really good speech 4 years ago.

If we wanted to elect a feel good President we could elect Dr. Phil or Rosey.

We need experience and a proven leader.

With the global threats and the problems at home we don't need some untested johnny come lately, like Barry Obama, who may or may not be up to the task 6 months or a year into their first term.

We don't need cheap talk, empty talk, from an expensive suit either.

We also need someone who is vetted. Not someone like Barry Obama who has high school buddies showing up on the scene fresh out of jail, living in their car, and looking for money.

by dpANDREWS on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:45:40 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

And the cynical drama continues, on the next episode of MyDLC!

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:54:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It is not cynical in my opinion (none / 0)

It is real life ... high stakes.

Why not elect Brad Pitt President if experience doesn't matter? He seems smart. He is charismatic. He cares about people. He has ideas on how to deal with the environment and New Orleans, these are important issues after all.

Why not Ben Affleck? He is more up to speed on issues than a few Senators or House Reps in D.C.

Experience does matter.

by dpANDREWS on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i'm ten times more likely to vote for... (none / 0)

pitt or affleck than hillary. at least brad and ben (or bradben) won't vote to invade another country that doesn't threaten us. i'd even bet that both of them have more street smarts than hillary; they aren't likely to be conned by a george bush or saddam hussein.

there's experience, and then there's experience we don't want to go through again...

"I believe he can win. If he runs a campaign anywhere like the terrific campaign he ran to get the nomination, he'll win handily." - Ed Rendell

by bored now on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:20:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

DPAndrew you do no favor for your candidate with your remarks. It is people like you that makes me want to vote for the republican and not Hillary if she is the nominee. I was just warming up to her then I read your remarks and reality set in for me.

by BDM on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I don't know about that. But I do know that Hillary has not been held accountable for her "mistakes." She won't because she can't reconcile her AUMF and Kyle Lieberman vote. John McCain isn't quite so wishy washy.

Dare to be free.

by misscee on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:18:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton Corporate America's candidate (none / 0)

Listening comes first

by Moonwood on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:21:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Oh, yeah, his high school buddies. Please, tell me their names. Are they the ones he played basketball with?

In Hawaii?

At the wealthy private school?

The one Obama was only able to afford to attend because he had a scholarship?

I call you a liar. Prove me wrong.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:26:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I'm new here, but don't understand why you say things that, if you have a computer in front of you and the ability to google, you can easily find are not true.

Is this what myDD is? Folks trying to outdo each other about how ignorant of facts they are?

by converse on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:21:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Would you mind listing, chronologically, HRC's "35 years of experience" for me? I keep trying to add it up, but all my research shows she's been an elected official for less time than Obama...

Oh wait, we count her prior time in the whitehouse where she went on diplomatic missions with Sinbad. Never mind.

I'll work to get Hillary elected if she wins the nomination, and I concede she is a formidible candidate. But the idea that she has an overwhelming advantage in "experience" is patently ridiculous. NONE of the frontrunners has much experience, truth be told. If that's what we cared about, Joe Biden would be running away with the nomination.

by HSTruman on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:07:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

I do not buy, at all, that the only experience which counts is time spent as an elected official. If that's a good argument, why does your candidate constantly describe Donald Rumsfeld as a guy who had tremendous experience, but poor judgment? Because he spent a few years in Congress in the 1960s?

According to exit polls, New Hampshire voters who voted on the basis of experience went for Hillary over Obama by an incredible margin of 71% to 5%. (By comparison, "change" voters went for Obama over Hillary by a margin of 55-28.) Surely not all of these voters are idiots. Heck, even EDWARDS got more "experience" voters than Obama - not on a percentage basis, I mean more actual voters!

I submit that when you try to call Hillary inexperienced, you're fighting a losing battle against not just public opinion but logic as well. You seem to be trying too hard.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:32:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

My comment was obviously full of snark, and I agree with you that time as an elected official is hardly the measure of a candidate. I nonetheless think my overarching point stands -- NONE of the three D frontrunners are particularly experienced politicians by any objective metric. Yet only one of them is claiming to be. Your preferred candidate hasn't predicated his campaign on experience. Clinton has served as a Senator for two years longer than Edwards.

Sure, Hillary should get credit for the role she played in her husband's administration but if you merely listened to her "experience" talking points you would think her record looked like Joe Biden's or Chris Dodd's. It decidedly does not, which is what I'm addressing. Sorry to hear that you view that as somehow out of bounds.

by HSTruman on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:17:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Also, as a sidenote Rumsfeld's washington experience was a bit more extensive than you credit. Congressman, WH Chief of Staff, and Secretary of Defense under Ford before coming back under Bush.

by HSTruman on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:19:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

My point was that those other jobs were not elected positions.

I frankly think Hillary has an amazing resume. It's worth whatever you feel it's worth, obviously, but it pains me to see people compare her to Laura Bush.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 12:20:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

She's got a great resume, no argument there. Again, I really don't hate the woman and will readily concede her many talents. I simply don't think that she's credible when she presents herself as having overwhelmingly more experience than Obama or Edwards. Community organizing, serving as a civil rights attorney, and as an effective state legislator ought to count. So should Edwards career spent fighting corporate misdeeds. Hillary's argument, in my view, seems to requrie crediting her experience as an unelected official while ignoring her opponents.

Anyway, not trying to beat a dead horse. I wasn't trying to disrespect Hillary's past experience.

by HSTruman on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 11:25:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

Those are actually two great candidates.

I actually admire them both.

When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line

by lori on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:48:39 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I'll bet you'd like a Unity ticket. If McCain doesn't win, maybe you'd like to see Hillary make him her VP? That would really thrill David Brooks and Joe Klein, not to mention James Carville and Al From.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 03:53:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

McCain wins--unless Iraq tanks or the economy is
in a real recession. As a HRC supporter, that's a painful reality.

by mikelow1885 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:23:08 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Now you don't even believe in your own candidate? The cynicism has reached epic proportions.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:31:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Face it, this country wouldn't know what's best for them if it hit them in the front of the head.

They'll elect a pro-war, pro-Bush candidate because he's "likeable" and then bitch about it for four years.

People don't like her, they like him. I don't like her, I like him, but I'll vote for her over him because we need change, not a Bush with a new face.

Others won't

The Democratic Party doesn't live or die with the Clintons

by nrafter530 on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:09:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I'm starting to wonder if people have actually seen John McCain this year.

I find the idea of John McCain to be a formidable opponent for any Dem. The actual John McCain, 2008 edition, not so much.

I remember Reagan well enough to recall the age arguments and how he dealt with them. Increasingly, I have trouble imagining McCain pulling it off. And temper-wise, he's really going to lose it at some point.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:30:22 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

His "victory" speech was a massive snooze - I hope you're right.

Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!

by X Stryker on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I watched a video of him the other day being interviewed by Ana Marie Cox on a train ride (I'd show you if I could find it). She was asking him about his "stay in Iraq for 100 years" comment - just ordinary questions, really - and he was extremely agitated and abrupt with her. It's the kind of demeanor that would never play well.

We shouldn't forget how much the McCain phenomenon is the product of wholesale stage management by the media, because they absolutely adore him. They cover up for his foibles and they adulate him constantly, but keep in mind how much things have changed in the last eight years.

It's much, much harder to stage-manage everything about a campaign. You have 24/7 coverage from bloggers, you have YouTube, you're guaranteed to be embarrassed by unscripted moments time and time again. And no matter how much the media fluffs McCain, I really don't think he can pull off the maverick act again.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:38:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

McCain didn't object when that woman called Hillary a bitch. Didn't that help you warm up to him, even a little bit?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 04:59:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

candidates should never contradict voters... (none / 0)

unless they are correcting the voter on their own candidacy or positions.

now i'm not saying that john mccain follows his advisors' advice, but every candidate is told this.

personally, if i was working for that campaign (and had been at the event) i would have piped up and said, you can't say that on tv! then the candidate would have undoubtedly agreed. but mccain has been campaigning with minimal staff, and so was unprotected. hence, we are talking about this.

my point is that it wasn't mccain's role to scold the voter, it was his job to win their vote. but the fact that he was there without a traditional staff left him unprotected from this kind of controversy...

"I believe he can win. If he runs a campaign anywhere like the terrific campaign he ran to get the nomination, he'll win handily." - Ed Rendell

by bored now on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:48:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

I think Clinton mops the floor w/McCain.

I think Huckabee is more challenging- because his populism probably cuts significantly into some "Reagan" Democrats ready to come back, and certainly the evangelicals don't stay home like they would with McCain, Romney or Guiliani.

Interestingly, I think Obama takes out Huckabee (because independents and even religious voters aren't afraid of Obama) but has trouble w/McCain due to the experience thing.

Would you hire George W Bush to be YOUR latex salesman?

by jgkojak on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:05:35 PM EST

I think Edwards is our strongest candidate (none / 0)

but otherwise I agree with you that HRC would have an easier time dealing with McCain, and Obama would have an easier time dealing with huckabee.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:12:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

"can't stand them--the Clinton talking heads. For once, I agree with kos. To find them all back in my living room, on my computer screen and in my newspapers --and to imagine that it might be like this for eight more years--is a tough pill to swallow. My uneasiness with Clinton is all about the past. I have never been able to get past the Monica thing and all the damage it did to the dem party. The Clinton machine is not very good at apologizing. But they are good at spinning excuses."

The Clinton years were very good ones in many ways, however: booming GDP,job growth and wealth, low inflation, unparalled prestige for the US abroad, few if any Americans dying abroad. It is the results that matter, not the style of the people who bring it.

by Bob H on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:20:30 PM EST

Re: Clinton and McCain (none / 0)

Don't agree that she's the best candidate and don't like the idea of the Clinton "twofer" geting a third term, but appreciate the fact that you used some specific historical examples to make your point.

by converse on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:27:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well, the campaign's spin anyway... (none / 0)

the fact that a fifty-year concensus on nuclear non-proliferation was allowed to pass with the expansion of acknowledged nuclear states is not exactly something that the world feels warm about...

"I believe he can win. If he runs a campaign anywhere like the terrific campaign he ran to get the nomination, he'll win handily." - Ed Rendell

by bored now on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 05:50:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Which happens to be an issue (none / 0)

that Obama, the supposed "empty suit", knows a hell of a lot about. His trip with Lugar in 2005(?) can certainly be chalked up as good experience.

by converse on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 06:00:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton and McCain (2.00 / 1)

Do you really have to be so nasty about it- I do worry about McCain- but only because it will be very hard for any democrat to beat him if he is the nominee- not impossible, but it will be rough going.

NY TIMES ENDORSEMENT: "Mrs. Clinton is more qualified, right now, to be president.... She would be a strong commander in chief."

by reasonwarrior on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 09:39:34 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login