The Fight Over The ’90s
Tweet
I love Bill Clinton, but this is a fair point for the Obama campaign to make. The presidency of Bill Clinton was clearly good for the country, but it was horrible for the Democratic party. Furthermore, without Bill Clinton at the center of it all, the party essentially collapsed after his presidency. It wasn’t until 2006 and the implementation of Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy that the party recovered from its 1990s losses.
I think one of the major concerns for primary voters is a candidate who, once elected, will also have coattails. I think the concerns about Sen. Clinton not having coattails on election day are not valid, but I think it’s after that that matters. Many would like to see 60 Democratic senators in order to get this important legislation to pass, and the contest is who can deliver.
One Response to “The Fight Over The ’90s”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America

What in the Hell is the Obama campaign thinking? That the way to the nomination is to take out the most popular Dem leader since JFK?
I don’t think this is a place they needed to go.
Let’s see how the Dem public reacts, but I’m thinking that, just like his comments about “the GOP was the party of ideas in the 90′s” and “Ronald Reagan’s Presidency was more transformational than Bill Clinton’s”, someone is giving his campaign very, very bad advice and terrible direction.
He should be talking about why and how HE is positively the one who can lead us to “yes we can”, and not stoop and drag us to “no, they didn’t” or “no, they can’t.”
He has the “yes, we can” deal on the table, he has a huge number of interested buyers, but this is going to alienate more people than bring in new buyers, and close that deal.
If his campaign is REALLY behind this, he risks losing my support entirely, and I was set to support him 100% if he was chosen as our candidate. And I don’t think I’d be the only one.
I will not support Democrats who tear down other Democrats by using demonization and GOP talking points.