September 7th, 2008 By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Yes, the phone finally rang at 3 a.m. next to Senator Hillary Clinton’s bed and she answered it and responded — but not yet in the way the caller perhaps had in mind. The call went out because now some things have clearly changed in the wake of the Republican convention.
The caller: Democratic Senator Barack Obama who wants Clinton out on the stump to shore-up Democratic voters and also counter the political and political-rock-star appeal of Republican John McCain’s controversial running mate Gov. Sarah Palin, a crowd-drawing new celebrity for the Republicans who have gone after Obama for being a crowd-drawing celebrity.
Clinton has started responding but, as the L.A. Time’s blogger Andrew Malcolm notes, in an eyebrow-raising way: She is refraining from going after Palin and pulling her political punches when it comes to her Senate friend McCain.
A very interesting thing didn’t happen Saturday.
Appearing at a labor rally and stumping for congressional candidates in New York, Sen. Hillary Clinton uttered her most popular line from the recent Democratic National Convention in Denver: [Senators John McCain Republican nominee for president and Hillary Clinton Democratic loser for her party’s top nomination share a close friendship] “No Way. No how. No McCain.” This time she added, “No Palin.”
But despite some soft lobs by media with her, that’s as far as the female candidate who got closer to a major party’s top nomination than any other in American history would go in criticizing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the first female top ticket member in Republican Party history.
Despite continued grumbling among her supporters about a less-than-diligent effort by the Barack Obama crowd to help the New York senator retire her immense campaign debts, Clinton has been living up to her promise to fund-raise and campaign for the Democratic ticket all over.
She has repeated the “No way. No how” line about John McCain many times and warned against four more….
…years of a Bush-like administration.
But she’s been very careful to avoid saying harsh things against her good friend from Arizona, who was among the first to welcome and show the former first lady around the old-boys club of the Senate on her arrival in 2001.
Hillary Clinton may be the most obvious choice to throw into the ring against the new darling of American politics, Sarah Palin, but the failed Democratic presidential candidate is refusing the job.
“We’re not going to be anybody’s attack dog against Sarah Palin,” a Clinton insider said yesterday.
It’s an extraordinary act of hubris from a woman whose success in exposing Barack Obama’s weakness in working-class Democratic states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana may have been the reason that John McCain chose a gun-toting, God-loving mother of five as his running mate.
Although she is 60 and unlikely to have another shot at the White House, Clinton is apparently concerned that she would appear ungenerous to the Republicans’ first female vice-presidential candidate if she were to go after her.
It is a rationale that will fuel the belief - lingering among Democrats since Al Gore’s failed 2000 presidential run - that the Clintons always put themselves before their party.
There has been a big shift since the Republican convention — a shift in the always all-knowing conventional wisdom comprised of pundits, all-wise left and right partisan pundits on radio talk shows and on those proliferating left and right cable partisan talk shows masquerading as news shows that are the equivalent of political infomercials.
SEE UPDATE BELOW
It’s now perceived as a race more-even-than-ever with increasing suggestions that, yes, McCain could well win it due to his base being energized and due to a fact most analysts won’t say bluntly:
The Republicans have proven themselves much better at winning national campaigns and the Democrats have often shown themselves inept at national campaigns, frequently grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory.
Just look at some of the political news on this first weekend after the conventions. It isn’t the same panorama as before the conventions — and most of it should make Republicans smile:
From what we can gather so far from central Europe, there is little love for Sarah Palin or the McCain campaign’s apparent embrace of the Karl Rove election strategy.
Author, historian and political scientist Nicole Bacharan finds irony in the tactics used by the Republican Party, and fears that the more tolerant America that appeared to be emerging may once again be submerged under the out-sized influence of the Christian right.
“Up to now, John McCain, not much liked by his party, was trying to attract independents and moderates. The arrival of Sarah Palin radically alters this pattern: it greatly polarizes the election and has triggered an outbreak of moral intolerance in the campaign.
“There is cause to protest this equation in which a particular group - the Christian right - has a monopoly on morality, while all others are presumed to be living in debauchery. What a paradox for the Republican Party, always hostile to the encroachment of the state, to have become the champion of religious values imposed by public force!”
“Long divided between Obamistas and Clintonites, the Pepsi Center arena in Denver definitively shook Wednesday night, in one of those theatrical political coups the Americans are so fond of. … Barack Obama leaves the convention in Denver with the keys to the Democratic Party. He has 67 days to convince Americans to give him the keys to the country.”
Among the many perceptions emerging across the Atlantic since the end of the Democratic National Convention is that Joe Biden has helped U.S. Democrats get over their traditional hesitance to fight as hard and nastily as they need to, in order to beat the Republicans.
“On Wednesday Biden was cutting, aggressive and assertive. … Biden has a reputation as a specialist in foreign policy and he used this authority to mount a frontal attack on McCain - and the value of his oft-quoted experience on the issue. Up to that moment, the Democrats had appeared to be suffering from their classic disease of election-campaign uncertainty and reluctance to meet Republican attacks head-on … It looks as though the Democrats have finally grown some teeth. It remains to be seen if they can be relied upon to take a good bite out of their opponents.”
“Yes, he did show his teeth and he bit … but only in such a way that it would still be possible for McCain to lead a respectful campaign. Because above all, Obama merely defined what kind of change he wants and said that McCain was a symbol stagnation that the nation could no longer afford. Obama spoke about the big issues - and it’ll be interesting to see whether McCain will do that as well or continue with the personal attacks.”
Etschmayer also discusses the effectiveness of McCain’s attacks on Obama’s experience. One wonders after the selection of inexperienced Alaska Governor Sarah Palin how credible such attacks will be from hereon out.
“No one was deceived: Hillary Clinton did what she had to do for her party of U.S. Democrats: she has unmistakably gotten behind Barack Obama. Read the rest of this entry »
This post is one of the few times where I choose to stand on top of my soapbox and let out my frustration with the political universe.
What has happened to John McCain? I have fond memories of the principled, strong and independent maverick that captured the imagination of the American people back in 2000. Unfortunately, those days and that John McCain have vanished into thin air. Over the last few days, I have noticed a disturbing trend in Camp McCain: the unforgivable sounds of a schoolyard bully who has resorted to whining to get his way.
As the last words left the mouth of Senator Clinton, the McCain campaign had its spin machine in full gear stating “Sen. Clinton ran her presidential campaign making clear that Barack Obama is not prepared to lead as commander in chief. Nowhere tonight did she alter that assessment. Nowhere tonight did she say that Barack Obama is ready to lead.” The whole point of the comment is what Hillary Clinton did not say. This is from a man who does not know how many houses he owns and confuses the Green Bay Packers with the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Prior to President Clinton’s speech last night, a McCain spokesperson (paraphrasing) said that while they expect President Clinton to say negative things about Senator McCain in a partisan political setting, President Clinton has said very nice things about Senator McCain in the past. To me that is political shorthand that means don’t pay attention to what Bill Clinton said at the Democratic Convention because he doesn’t really mean it (and we have proof).
Today, I have no doubt that the spin from Camp McCain will be focused on who is not in attendance at Invesco Field. It is not a big deal that several Republican Senators are not even bothering to show up in Minneapolis next week. While the sound bites may help the networks fill their time, the more interesting question is why does the McCain campaign need to grab the attention all of the time? Is it political gamesmanship or a constant need to feel relevant?
What happened to John McCain? The positive maverick for change has been replaced by the negative cynic of the institutional status quo. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you…Senator McComplain.
Tonight, Barack Obama —half black, half white—steps up to the podium in Denver to accept the nomination of the Democratic Party for President of The United States.
Whether by coincidence or not, his acceptance speech comes exactly 45 years to the day after Martin Luther King Jr. gave his momentous, unforgettable “I Have a Dream” speech.
Yesterday, here in Texas, we celebrated the day when another civil rights champion, President Lyndon Baines Johnson, would have celebrated his 100th birthday.
What a confluence of circumstances. What a perfect political and civil rights storm.
No doubt, Barack Obama will address Martin Luther King’s “Dream”: how much of it has come true, but also how much still awaits to be realized.
A little over a month ago, we celebrated another anniversary. July 26 marked the 60th anniversary of the end of segregation in our armed forces. On that occasion, I wrote a post “Two Anniversaries, Two Presidential Candidates’ Positions,” commenting on another “coincidence” of anniversaries: the aforementioned 60th anniversary and the fact that it was 15 years since President Bill Clinton signed a law that came to be known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t tell,” a policy that prohibits openly gay individuals from serving in the military.
At the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the integration of our armed forces, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said:
Our commemoration today of the racial integration of the armed forces makes us reflect on how far we have come toward living up to our founding ideals and yet how much remains to be done.
and,
We must make sure the American military continues to be a great engine of progress and equality.
Since then, in my posts, I have urged Mr. Gates and other U.S. leaders to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to the civil rights of our gay and lesbian military members.
Since then, some have commented that one should “cool it,” have patience on this issue; that “nobody wants this shoved down our throats…”, or “can’t you wait until January?” Some consider such “don’t rock the boat” attitude as safe, conventional wisdom.
Perhaps. But, also perhaps, if Martin Luther King, Cesar Chavez, Rosa Parks, and so many others had listened to the same “conventional wisdom,” and “cooled it,” “had patience,” or “waited until January,” we might still be waiting for parts of that “Dream” to come true.
So, let me go against “Conventional Wisdom” and urge Barack Obama to, tonight, address not only the broad issue of discrimination based on sexual orientation, but also reaffirm his previous statement of policy with regard to “Don’t ask, Don’t tell.”:
I agree with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. I will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.
Having had the night to sleep on the evening’s affairs in Denver, even though many of my co-authors here have already done yeoman’s work on the subject, I would reflect on some of the changes I saw in the Democrats’ presentation. Going essentially in reverse order, one of the most revealing moments of the evening for me was Joe Biden’s speech. While I have been critical of Obama’s choice in selecting him, after listening to his speech I have to say I’m at least beginning to “get it.” Biden stepped up at what may be one of the most high pressure, glaring moments of public scrutiny in a career already full of such moments, and showed me something I wasn’t expecting. His easy, almost casual, “aww shucks” attitude made him seem to be a very real, connected person.
And that attitude made it all the more powerful when he went on the attack against John McCain. (Something which has been totally lacking during the first two nights of the convention.) Personally I thought he could have done even more - where were the mentions of Dick Cheney? Guantanamo? - but his delivery was spot on and hit all the right notes. If Obama was looking for an effective attack dog who could do the job without looking like a scowling, unpleasant Cheney type figure, he may well have found that person in Joe Biden. Yes, there will be those who will try to focus on inconsequential details such as mixing up “brigade” with “battalion” but it’s hard to picture any serious critic saying this was anything less than a powerful, effective speech.
Obama may well need a sure-footed attack dog, too. During the early part of the Summer, McCain stuck to talking about the issues, primarily energy, education and the economy, and Obama stubbornly held on to a slim but steady lead of five to ten points in the polls. Then, during the last month, the media arm of Big Mac’s campaign appeared to throw the issues under the bus (except for drilling, which gained him some traction) and began slinging industrial size buckets of mud at Obama to see what might stick. And that finally moved the polls, with McCain pulling into a tie. Obama will need to find a way to swing back or he’s going to end up - alongside Hillary Clinton - as a high value answer in future editions of Trivial Pursuit. Biden last night looked like he may well fill that role effectively.
One of the real surprises (perhaps because of the highly anticipated expectations of failure) was the speech by Bill Clinton. We will see some of our friends on the Right struggling to “read between the lines” and stir more trouble, but Clinton delivered above and beyond the limit in making it clear that he and his wife were on board with Obama’s nomination. This was aided by the doubtless painful moment when Hillary cut the role call short and put her personal seal of approval on Obama’s candidacy.
On a side note, what were the Democrats’ thinking in putting John Kerry up on the stage? His reception by the audience was tepid at best, and do they really want to remind the country of the 2004 election? You don’t feature the horse who finished last at the following year’s Kentucky Derby. Still, that one happened during the off hours and nobody saw the speech unless they had C-SPAN 17 on at the time. But really… John Kerry?
As for tonight, Obama’s greatest challenge does not come from the Republicans, but from the almost unbelievable expectations which have been set by his own team. He is speaking on the anniversary of MLK’s “I have a dream” speech. He will be standing in front of columns which are reminiscent of either Washington state buildings or Greco-Roman temples, depending on whom you ask. He is moving from the convention center to Invesco Field, one of the biggest venues in the country. They have been building expectations up for this speech since June, and now he will have to deliver. Obama is still widely considered one of the great political orators of this generation, but this may be a bit much for even his delivery skills to overcome.
Then again, I’m wrong more than I’m right in the prediction game lately. Maybe he’ll still come out and surprise us all.
While I was effusive in my praise for Hillary Clinton’s speech at the Democratic National Convention the other night and was willing to let pass the fact that she didn’t give Barack Obama a big wet smooch in urging her supporters to get with the program, it was with trepidation that I surfed away from the Phillies-Mets post-game show to see what Bill “Famously Hurt Feelings” Clinton had to offer when it was his turn on the Denver dais.
In the run-up to the second most most anticipated speech of the convention, my snarky side whispered to my non-judgmental side (yes, I have one) that Bill would have no choice but to make nice or things would be mighty-chilly in the old marital bed back home in Chappaqua. But then it occurred to both my sides that the Clintons’ marriage has almost certainly been one of convenience — call it power sharing — for a good many years.
Anyhow, reading between Hillary’s lines the other night I finally if belatedly understood why PUMAs and other aggrieved supporters still were unable to let go. It’s a Republican dirty trick. (I’m joking. I think.)
More to the point is that these women felt a sense of entitlement, that this was the year one of their own would burst through the glass ceiling of American politics and make it to the Big Dance and beyond. As misplaced as focusing their feelings of betrayal on Obama may be, I can still relate. (For the record, note that Greek-Americans didn’t seem to feel betrayed when Bill Clinton muscled aside Paul Tsongas in 1992 to grab the nomination.)
It’s Bill’s own sense of entitlement and feelings of betrayal that are less easy to understand, but after his speech I think I have a clue or two about a man whose ego is even bigger than his legendary libido.
I have heard Clinton give better speeches. This one was at least adequate if somewhat disjointed, and its greatest strength was linking John McCain to not just the failures of the Bush administration, but its ideology. That is the theme more than any other that will propel Obama to the White House.
So Clinton did what he had to do –but he should have did what he had to do weeks ago and not played patty-cake with the media and his wife’s base through a series of deliberate leaks and non-denials concerning his aggrievement with Obama.
Okay, maybe it was a pretty good speech. But in the end it was more important for Clinton to feel high and mighty and try to leverage a process that he should have been no part of than go after McCain from the jump. That lost opportunity may not necessarily translate into lost votes for Obama, but Clinton’s post-presidential legacy — already tarnished because of his slash-and-burn conduct during the primaries — was not rehabilitated with one sincere-sounding speech.
August 28th, 2008 By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
They wowed them and, in many cases, exceeded expectations. Or did they? Two speeches.
One, by former President Bill Clinton who seemingly took a deep breath and put reportedly-simmering resentments aside to deliver a partisan speech contrasting how Americans lived under his administration versus under President George W. Bush’s, linking Republican John McCain to Bush and making the case that Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama is ready for the White House. Clinton will skip town tomorrow to avoid Obama’s acceptance speech. But his speech and vow to campaign, to many, has likely already started an intraparty political redemption.
The other, by Vice Presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden. He gave conventioneers and viewers a taste of why he’s considered a good orator, a likable politician who isn’t quite perfect (flubbing some lines), someone who can project through the video tube and connect with audiences, and a speaker who can give juicy red, rhetorical meat.
But was it enough meat? Some critics — including some worried Democrats — fear the convention frittered away limited time needed to define McCain to sway voters and excite the party faithful. The Democrats did get red meat — but in chintzy portions.
Next week the GOP will throw out its read meat in servings big enough to cause heart disease.
Will this be yet one more convention pundits will point to on Election Day saying “You could see why the Democrats were doomed this summer by the way they wasted their convention”?
Here’s a comprehensive sampling of mainstream and new media reaction to the Bill Clinton and Biden speeches:
August 28th, 2008 By DAVID SCHRAUB, Assistant Editor
I saw President Clinton and Senator Biden’s speeches tonight (but not Senator Kerry’s). Admittedly I saw them at a wine night, so I might have been somewhat distracted. And that might explain why I’m not as high on either speech as many others are. Certainly, I think Hillary Clinton blew both out of the water.
President Clinton’s speech, I thought, was particularly flat. It felt disjointed, I didn’t feel like his heart was truly in it, and it never really developed thematically. Particularly given Clinton’s higher baseline, I felt disappointed. The irony is that, before he started speaking, I was really excited and all my friends were more reserved. I still like Bill Clinton, whereas they were less-forgiving of his efforts against Obama in the primaries. Afterward, I had the most negative assessment of the speech, and I was definitively in the minority.
Biden’s speech I thought was significantly better. His son’s introduction was heart-wrenching, although I wonder if between that and Michelle Obama’s speech there has been a bit too much sentimentality. Biden started a bit slow, and stepped on a lot of his lines (though once it yielded a gem, when he accidentally(?) called John McCain “George”). The old debater in me didn’t like that. But he picked up the pace and really started to light up McCain as he went on. He developed the meme that I think is, ultimately, the strongest case Obama can make against McCain: he was wrong. He might have experience, but his experience is at being wrong. I still think he could have been even more aggressive (apparently Kerry set the standard for the evening), but it was still quite good.
But again, I seem to be in the minority. Andrew Sullivan has blogreactions, and they seem mostly positive (excepting Linda Chavez, and honestly I don’t care what she thinks). So maybe I’m just being a grump. Wouldn’t be the first time.
Bill Richardson had been scheduled to speak to the convention tonight but, because President Clinton ran over (big surprise there), he will now speak tomorrow (maybe).
Former President Clinton spoke this evening and as usual it was a superb delivery. With the passing of former President Reagan, there is probably nobody out there who can deliver a speech like Clinton does. He can bring a crowd to their feet and hold them in the palm of his hand.
I also thought he did a much better job of supporting Senator Obama. While some suggested that Hillary did the best she could in terms of offering support for Obama, it seems Bill was able to find more ways to do it.
He directly addressed the issues of experience and made some very effective arguments about why he thinks Obama is the best choice and why he is ready to lead:
He has a remarkable ability to inspire people, to raise our hopes and rally us to high purpose. He has the intelligence and curiosity every successful President needs. His policies on the economy, taxes, health care and energy are far superior to the Republican alternatives. He has shown a clear grasp of our foreign policy and national security challenges, and a firm commitment to repair our badly strained military. His family heritage and life experiences have given him a unique capacity to lead our increasingly diverse nation and to restore our leadership in an ever more interdependent world. The long, hard primary tested and strengthened him. And in his first presidential decision, the selection of a running mate, he hit it out of the park.
With Joe Biden’s experience and wisdom, supporting Barack Obama’s proven understanding, insight, and good instincts, America will have the national security leadership we need.
Barack Obama is ready to lead America and restore American leadership in the world. Ready to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Barack Obama is ready to be President of the United States.
That seems to me a much stronger statement of support than Senator Clinton was able to deliver last night.
I do take exception with the next part of his remarks when he called on the need to fight diseases like AIDS and TB overseas. While President Bush has many faults, he has been stronger than any other President in providing help to Africa.
Following the theme of many speakers, he paid tribute to Senator McCain as a good man who is wrong on the key issues. I think this is a good tactic for the Democrats despite those who consider it flawed.
He then got into the red meat section of the speech where he attacked the GOP record over the last 8 years and suggested that McCain would be more of the same.
They took us from record surpluses to an exploding national debt; from over 22 million new jobs down to 5 million; from an increase in working family incomes of $7,500 to a decline of more than $2,000; from almost 8 million Americans moving out of poverty to more than 5 and a half million falling into poverty - and millions more losing their health insurance.
He concluded his remarks by a traditional Clinton rallying cry for everyone to unite and support Obama/Biden in November and brought the room to their feet.
Or at least most of the room.
One of the great advantages of the modern DVR is the ability to rewind live television and it allowed me to notice something interesting. Of all the people in the arena there seemed to be two who were not especially happy with the address.
Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama.
Each time the cameras panned to either woman during an applause line it seemed to me that their applause and reaction was quite strained. Neither seemed really pleased to be there or with what Bill was saying.
Hillary had her standard fake smile that she always seems to have when Bill is speaking and given the somewhat-rocky history between them I can understand why she probably is not his biggest fan.
But Michelle Obama seemed to be quite unhappy as well. Perhaps the reports of things Bill supposedly said are still not resting well with her.
Again overall it was a great speech, better than Hillary’s in my view but it was also interesting to read the faces in the crowd and find that perhaps things are not quite as happy as they seem between the Clintons and the Obamas or indeed the Clintons themselves.
Admittedly probably not going to impact the campaign much, but it was interesting to see.
August 27th, 2008 By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Was last night’s convention a sign that the Democratic Party is now on the path to unity rather that forming a circular firing squad? The conventional wisdom seems that it’s all coming together — but some spot signs at the convention and elsewhere that the Democrats are again working overtime to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
August 27th, 2008 By MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor
I continue to go back and forth on Hillary’s speech last night. It was, on the whole, rather impressive. As I put it last night, she did what she needed to do for Obama, for the Democratic Party, and, perhaps first and foremost, for herself and her political future. Regarding that last point, I didn’t care for all the gratuitous self-promotion, but, of course, such self-promotion is what her more ardent supporters wanted. They still think she deserves the nomination, after all, and, watching and listening to Hillary last night, it’s pretty clear she thinks she does, too.
One notable exception I take to Hillary’s speech is that, while she praised Biden and even McCain personally, she said nothing about Obama other than to express her support for him in the election and to encourage Democrats, all Democrats, including her more ardent supporters, to vote for him. She may still not think he’s qualified for the presidency, but a few words about his leadership and other qualities would have been nice. All I can remember is a line about building change from the bottom, not from the top, but applying it generally, not just to Obama.
Like others, I am hopeful that perhaps, just perhaps, the task of praising Obama personally, and of asserting that he is indeed qualified for the presidency, ready for the job, has fallen to Bill, who speaks tonight. Hillary may not have been able to do so, given her past criticisms of Obama on the experience and readiness fronts, but Bill could, and his support would be especially meaningful given his rather objectionable performance, if I may put it kindly, during the primaries and his seemingly lingering bitterness. Tonight may be about national security — with both Bill and Biden speaking — but it is also about building up Obama for tomorrow.
Which one will show up, the starry-eyed boy in the photograph reaching out to shake JFK’s hand or the LBJ lookalike of later years, all guile, ego and appetite?
Tonight will punctuate the quarter of a century we have lived with the many Bill Clintons–the centrist with ideals, the “it’s the economy, stupid” realist, the target of right-wing hatred, the self-destructive skirt chaser who tarnished his presidency, humiliated his wife and would do anything to give her the Oval Office as a consolation prize.
The advance word is unsettling–jockeying over what the topic of his speech should be and reports that he will leave town before tomorrow night’s stadium acceptance speech.
But of all today’s political figures, Bill Clinton of Hope, Arkansas who grew up without a father and created himself out of brains, charm and ambition should understand Barack Obama of Hawaii who did the same a generation later.
The expectation is that Bill Clinton’s bruised ego will be more on display tonight than his gift for empathy. Is it too much to hope that the JFK-inspired boy in him will emerge to join today’s Kennedys, young and old, to pass the torch without burning down the building?
It would bring him full circle to where he started and hoped to end.
Cross-posted from my blog, along with reaction to Hillary’ speech here.
August 27th, 2008 By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Yet another signal from former President Bill Clinton, in an increasingly long list of news reports indicating that, unlike most professional politicians, he is unable to put on a happy face to show that he favors party unity over a specific candidate: he’s going skip Democratic Sen. Barack Obama’s acceptance speech.
August 26th, 2008 By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
In the history of both parties we have seldom seen such a spectacle:
Bill Clinton appeared to undermine Sen. Barack Obama again Tuesday.
The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.
He said: “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”
Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”
Some have suggested that recent reports about Bill Clinton’s lingering ire were overblown. This remark in public is basically confirmation of the reports about his attitude in private and what’s going on behind the scenes. Rather than campaign for the nominee of his own party, he’s now in-essence campaigning against him and rubbing salt in intra-party wounds. And, if Obama loses, he expects that passionate supporters of Obama are going to forget remarks like this? His speech to the convention should be interesting…
Having had the night to sleep on the evening’s affairs in Denver, even though many of my co-authors here have already done yeoman’s work on the subject, I would reflect on some of the changes I saw in the Democrats’ presentation. Going essentially in reverse order, one of the most revealing moments of the evening for me was Joe Biden’s speech. While I have been critical of Obama’s choice in selecting him, after listening to his speech I have to say I’m at least beginning to “get it.” Biden stepped up at what may be one of the most high pressure, glaring moments of public scrutiny in a career already full of such moments, and showed me something I wasn’t expecting. His easy, almost casual, “aww shucks” attitude made him seem to be a very real, connected person. 
