Obama's PsyOP against Bill Clinton (what do you think)

[CreekDog]

Any thoughts that Obama by saying the Republicans were the party of ideas in the 1990's was under the radar trying to bait Bill Clinton into an argument that Clinton would take too far and thus would backfire? I mean, that is what happened, but I'm wondering if that's what was intended.

My other thought was the whole David v. Goliath thing. Having Bill Clinton criticize Obama definitely sets that up (how many of you outside New England are hoping the Giants win the Superbowl?).

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. He certainly was trying to get under Bill Clinton's skin

I don't think anyone could have anticipated Clinton's bizarre behavior in the aftermath, though.

[CreekDog]

2. Clinton has a famous temper

And he is a disaster when angry.

I wonder if they were trying to bait him into getting angry at Obama knowing it would backfire because Clinton would overdo it and would also make Obama look like David in the David/Goliath.

And Americans have this weird thing for people on the ropes, like when they turned against Gore because Gore was just way too much better than Bush in the first debate. (the media was complicit, but anyway)

[bellasgrams]

5. Who wouldn't get angry over the things BO did. And by the way

His initials are starting to be a good statement on him. I'm really disappointed, I never thought a dem would stoop this low. But I guess when you don't have much but rock star status he feels like anything goes. I just hope if Clinton or Edwards don't make it an upstanding, qualified, honest person will step in and take BO's place.

[CreekDog]

8. I'm not arguing whether Clinton's anger was justified (perhaps it was)

The point is you do what's helpful to the campaign if you want that campaign to succeed. Whichever side does that the most is going to win.

I think Hillary is a much underestimated candidate, however, I think the people she surrounds herself with leave a lot to be desired in terms of advancing that campaign. It troubles me that she doesn't seem to fix this. Let's face it, the win in New Hampshire was probably 100% her doing and 0% Bill and 0% Mark Penn. That's her formula for success. If she puts the men around her in charge or in key roles, she's going to do poorly.

I also think the people advising her are stuck in a 1990's mindset when the political landscape has advanced half a generation. The strategy of 1995/6 is ill suited to today.

[neutron]

11. Obama was disrespectful and misinformed

He's too vindictive to be presidential material.

[bklyncowgirl]

19. The people Hillary surrounds herself with are all of her own choosing

A good manager hires people who suit her style. If she didn't want them doing the things they are doing, they would be fired. Alright, she can't fire Bill--he's a law unto himself--but with that exception she's pretty much made her own bed.

[ginnyinWI]

3. the truth is fair game either way

If he did it deliberately, then the Clintons have really underestimated who they are up against.

But Bill's responsible for his own actions, whether it was baiting or not. He didn't have to take it. The funniest part was when the media dug up all those pro-Republican statements by the Clintons. I think it takes a certain amount of hubris to believe that the media wouldn't call them on the hypocrisy. Either that or the Clinton machine isn't really what we've been led to believe it is.

[arewenotdemo]

12. Hubris and bluster. They've worked nicely in the past for Bill.

This is a new day and the torch is being passed.

Enjoy retirement, Big Dog. As an ex-president, it has its perks, I'm sure.

[hedgehog]

17. Here are 20 million of those perks, right here.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/01/bill_clinton_and_ron_burkle_ha.html

Bill Clinton will get $20 million when he divorces Los Angeles supermarket magnate and (alleged) Radar owner Ron Burkle, his business partner of six years, The Wall Street Journal told us this morning. The reason for the split, it seems, is that Burkle's Yupaica company, for which Clinton was an adviser, can't seem to stay away from people who could harm Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. For example? Italian developer Raffaello Follieri and Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai and one of the owners behind Xinhua Finance Media Ltd., a Beijing–based news company with close ties to the Communist government of China, which just gave Yucaipa a little cash infusion. Basically, Burkle loves sketchy investments like Eric Benet loved sex with groupies, and at this point in the election and his life, Clinton can't take the drama. "I love you, but I need to take care of myself," we imagine him saying to Burkle. "No more drama in my life." Despite Burkle's transgressions, the breakup appears to be amicable: A Clinton spokesperson speaks to the Journal not of a SPLIT!!! but "an appropriate transition" out of their business relationship, and Burkle remains a finance chair on Hillary's campaign.

[niceypoo]

15. The media and the republicans dug up everything Gore had ever said in 2000

then, taking it all out of context, used it to smear him as some sort of serial liar. The same thing is happening now. The whole frenzy is about nothing, and Obama knows it, but plays along with it. This might win him temporary sympathy in SC, but playing the victim card won't stand for very long. Obama is painting himself as chinless. If he cant learn to take it on the chin like a man, he will lose. Hillary has taken it on the chin for 15 years.

[cali]

18. that's what you wish to see but it ain't reality

Obama hasn't painted himself as the victim. That role belongs to Bill with his whine about how Obama put a hit on him and is kneecapping him. I sincerely hope the Clintons keep up their loser tactics. It's great for Obama and it'll help him out on Super Tuesday even if Hillary does take more delegates than Obama. And here's what Obama looks like: A winner. And confident. Expect more big endorsements and super delegates for him this week as well. She may still have the edge, Obama is moving up on her.

[DJ13]

4. Its possible

Obama's campaign is filled with former (Bill) Clinton people who would best know how to push his buttons.

Bill seems to have a large ego, so by Obama slighting his Presidency with the Reagan comment it could have been planned.

Hillary has a big problem know, if Bill doesnt stop he will continue damaging her candidacy and Obama continues reaping the goodwill from voters sick of Bill's attacks.

But if Bill does stop the two campaigns go back to fighting on just the issues, it will be comparable to when Hillary faced Obama on a level playing field where he beat her soundly in Iowa.

Hillary is boxed in, and its Bills fault.

[CreekDog]

9. Well, whatever the explanation, it's clear that Bill Clinton campaigning against Obama

was a big disaster and it got worse the longer it went on.

I'll say this much, I have never felt as bad about Bill Clinton as I have these past few weeks. If that is being played out among his legions, then that is very bad news.

I always felt she should run clearly on her own and that he should be 10 miles away because he simply overshadows whatever he's trying to support.

[aquart]

6. Very risky.

But Obama successfully shifted the spotlight completely away from Hillary after NH. Sexism disappeared in the anguished laments against racism coming from his "surrogates." THAT was risky. He even got spanked by distinguished black Americans who knew exactly what rig he was running. BUT IT STILL WORKED LIKE A CHARM. And the blame was on "The Clintons."

So would Obama take a big risk for a big payoff? Today tell you?

BTW, do you fully appreciate that new meme Obama started when he said he didn't know who he was running against? Notice how his people don't say Hillary anymore? They're saying "The Clintons." Who are, of course, ganging up on poor, lonely, brave, valiant Barack. That shark has teeth, dear.

[arewenotdemo]

13. It IS "the Clintons". Two-for-the-price, you know.

Bill's antics have clearly demonstrated that that is the reality.

And, to be sure, even though I might go 3rd party if Hillary wins (I really do not trust her on foreign policy and wish that she would just take her chair at AEI/AIPAC), knowing Bill would also be in the WH could make it easier to vote (D).

[CreekDog]

20. And it is a fair statement to say when you see the past couple weeks

I have heard more from Bill Clinton than Hillary.

I have heard as much or more about the presidency of Bill than about what Hillary would do.

[Tulkas]

7. It was a shot at the Clinton years because Hillary is running on that experience

And I am for the Pats, this seems to be the year to make history, (not just in football)

[John Q. Citizen]

10. That sounds like a conspiracy theory, and not a very good one. My guess Obama

is Obama, who is using change as a campaign theme, was trying to contrast himself, as the self stated current communicator of change, with the Clinton record. He was saying that Clinton didn't bring a heck of a lot of change to the country when he was president, thus we shouldn't expect Hillary to bring change to the country. And he used Reagan as an example of a president who did substantially change the country. <p>

Clinton for the most part went along with that change Reagan brought, passing NAFTA and the Telecommunications deregulation Act. He also ended welfare as we knew it, which was a theme of the Reagan presidency. The strategy was to try and divert the Obama theme by claiming Obama was praising Reagan, (instead of contrasting the changes Reagan wrought with the non- change of the Clinton era)when of course he did no such thing.

If the David/Goliath thing is happening, then Hillary has really blown it by early on trying to appear as inevitable. I mean, that's how Goliath appeared also, right?

I don't think there is anyway to pin Bill's words and actions on Obama. I think the Clinton Campaign made the decision to go after Obama after she came in third in Iowa, and finished a close 1st in both NH, and Nevada. Then seeing that he had a good shot at winning SC, they decided to try to paint Obama as only appealing to black voters. That may have backfired, time will tell.

[niceypoo]

14. Obama is playing the "boo! hoo!" card too much

He rarely even mentions the issues anymore. It really is getting pitiful. Endless Clinton bashing from Obamas side then endless whining at the slightest criticism of him.

God help him if he makes it into the general. If he is this sensitive to percieved slights in the primaries, he will get slaughtered in the general when the republican smear/attack machine and the media rip into him from 20 different angles at once, which is exactly what would happen.

[Kahuna]

16. The "Boo hoo card?" Bill was the one boo hooing about how

"Obama put a hit on me." That was just bizarre.

[JVS]

21. I don't mean to get all Thomist/ Scholastic on you, but this gets cut by Occam's razor

It's too risky, too intricate, too unpredictable. I think a much more simple explanation is in order. The stuff about "party of ideas" simply points to the fact that the republicans aggressively pursued an ideologically driven agenda, and that from 1994 on were dictating the direction of both policy and discourse. In a way it is an attack on Clinton's administration for being put on and kept on the defensive, but the idea that he could know that it was bait to be taken is way too steeped in hindsight.

[CreekDog]

22. Yeah, I can appreciate Occam's Razor too

It's far fetched, but it's crossed my mind.

The larger point is that what Obama said, though seemingly should be hurting him, that it got used by the Clintons against him the way they used it in fact made them look worse attacking him over it than he said saying it in the first place. Well, what do you know.