« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

“It’s all over but the shouting!” Bill Clinton is confident that Obama will LOSE in November.

The Democrat establishment and the MSM are rejoicing at the imminent announcement ( if not already made) that Bill Clinton will nominate Obama, and make the case for his re-election.

Why any Democrat would find this annoucement a source of joy boggles the mind. At the very least, it shows how worried, how desperate, the Obama campaign is; that they are willing to give Bubba the prime-time spotlight, where it’s all but guaranteed that the former president will greatly outshine the current one..( any doubt as to who gets the more, and louder, applause?)

And that’s even before attempting to divine what Clinton will say..even if he submits a draft for the Obama campaign’s approval, does anyone think that Slick Willie will stay on script? Remember the disgusting “ego walk” during the 2000 convention, as Clinton marched up to the podium? Gore was a dim bulb by comparison.

But we need to look beyond the obvious, dig deeply into the substrate, for anything involving the Clintons is never what is appears to be.

Let’s start with the Premise that Hillary is going to run in 2016. This is a given. Even those in the Dem camp who are NOT enamoured of a potential Clintonian restoration know that there is noboby else. The Dems will NOT again nominate a little known entity with no track record. Looking at the current stable of elected Democrat governors and senators, it’s mighty slim pickings:

Maryland Govenor Martin O’Malley has been carrying a lot of water for Obama on the airways, and effectively so, but Maryland’s fiscal problems will rule him out.

Andy Cuomo? Please..NY’s fiscal situation is a mess, and will only deteriorate further the next few years.

Deval Patrick? Not a chance. There is no way the Dems will nominate consecutive blacks for the White House.

There really isn’t nayone else but Hillary.

So then, imagine Bill and Hillary sharing ploting strategy. Does anyone, ( or rather, any rational person) think that should Obama somehow manage to win re-election; after the total mess the country would find itself in 2106, that any Democrat would have a chance of winning? Nope.

Ergo, Obama MUST lose for Hillary to have any chance of winning in 2016. And the Clintons know this.

And they also know that while Clinton’s appearance at the convention will energize the faithful, it won’t do a damn thing to move independent voters…who will decide this election. Indeed, Bubba’s track record of picking winners since he left office hasn’t exactly been stellar.

But this means that Bill Clinton has come to the conclusion that Obama has already lost, that Obama has NO chance of pulling this one out.

Way to go, Bill!!!!

COMMENTS

  • dragan

    You are saying that Obama should lose in order for Hillary to win in 2016. If that is the premise, why would Bill Clinton be the key note speaker at the convention ? So even if he goes off script and BASHES Obama, do you think the democratic machine will be with the Clintons going forward ? No way.

    You are right in saying that Bill is laying the ground for Hilary for 2016. However, I believe that he is doing so to strengthen the dem machine/base for 2016. He would want to test his muscle by pulling off a win for Obama. If Obama wins and the economy tanks going into 2016, Bill can easily blame O for the economic mess just as WE do for George Bush. He can then claim Hilary as the medicine for the tanked economy. Do you realize that George Bush is not allowed even in the vicinity of the Republican convention ? Clinton can easily pull the same stuff with O in 2016 by not allowing him anywhere near the dem machine/party

    By making O win, Clinton secures the dem unity and all they have to do is to have O as a collatoral damage in 2016. So your argument that O has to lose for Hilary to win 2016 is not strong

    • acat

      Two mistakes, dragan. First, you’re thinking of the Dems as a monolith. They aren’t.

      Second is the matter of favors. The Dem machine, since it isn’t a monolith, uses favors as the “currency” to get different groups to move.

      The Clintons and the (now defunct) DLC mastered the art of looking moderate/centrist while getting elected… in purple states – and specifically shoving hard-left ideologues (like Obama) off the ballot in the same purple States.

      The Clintons did a *lot* of favors during the Bush years..but called most of ‘em in trying to get Hillary nominated. They’re going to have to re-fill their favor bank again by 2016…. and that means getting Dems elected.

      The way the Clintons have most effectively gotten Dems elected in the past is the DLC model, eh?

      They don’t care who wins in 2012. They’re looking for a big PR splash / meet-and-greet at the convention, they’ll find out who needs favors, and go from there.

      Mew

      • APA Guy

        nt

  • gflyer3364qt

    From what I see, Clinton is pretty proud of his presidency and popularity, and he doesn’t like Obama going around undoing his signature achievements. In fact, he sees Obama as an incompetent amateur which is true. He doesn’t like Obama destroying Hillary’s chances.

  • teaforme2012

    that Bill Clinton actually wants his wife to be president. He sorta does have a track record on not necessarily doing what’s best for his wife.

    Aside from that, Democrats truly do envision a nation that will find it difficult to elect a Republican president for years to come, the way the electoral map is shifting. If ever there was a case for a one term president, Barack Obama would be it. As it stands now, throwing Obama out is no given, and I’m not entirely sure how this is possible.

    What is wrong with voters in Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin? How obvious does it have to be for them to see that these states are not prospering?

    • APA Guy

      The man is a lifelong narcissist…worse than Obama in many ways, and I believe he one day wants to be UN Secretary General. Given how popular he still is here and abroad, that prospect would be made more plausible with his wife in the White House.

      But that is only made possible by taking Obama out NOW because another Obama term will further destroy this country and ANY chance a Democrat has of winning in 2016.

      You see, the Clintons are incredibly intelligent. They aren’t about to sacrifice ambition for the greater glory of this pathetic excuse for a president and his bloated ego.

      • tnfriendofcoal101368

        Isn’t Bubba really John Edwards with a less sympathetic wife? I know it isn’t PC but…

        Slick Southern Lawyer (check for both)
        Serial Philanderer (check for both)
        Estranged relationship with the truth (check for both)

        What’s the difference? The only one I can see is Elizabeth Edwards had a cancer and passed away (admittingly sad).

        My point is the Obama Reign prosecutes John Edwards and invites Slick Willie to speak at the convention?

        • APA Guy

          Had Clinton lied under oath and defiled the office of the presidency in THIS economy with Obama’s policies, he would have been removed from office.

          The public remembers him for the high quality of life they enjoyed during his presidency. They have no such attachment to Edwards…that’s the difference between the two IMO.

          • APA Guy

            coffee anyone? :)

    • funwithknives

      Unions, and Race Card. At least where Michigan is concerned.

      There is no more than 3 degrees of separation betwen union members and someone who will vote in the general populace in the S/E michigan area. The Bailouts of G M and ChryCo reinforces the Progressives’ Balance hereabouts.

      …and Barry has the Af-Am vote cinched, no matter the evidence.
      You might as well talk to a brick wall. At least it knows what it is doing.

      I suspect We’ll Go Red but it is going to be a squeaker………
      No more than 4 points , to the good.
      If I’m wrong ,and it’s more, Providence lives at this house and copious amounts of potables will flow……

  • checkmate2012

    for exactly the reason you said: the country will be Dem weary especially after O’s horrendous reign of poverty so the Clinton’s need him to lose now, so Hill has a chance in 2016.

    Bill’s ego is huge and thrives by being in the public constantly. Seems he spends more time with GHB and GWB than he does with O.

    And Hill is distancing herself from O and won’t be at the convention! I think she took Sec. Of State to pad her foreign relations experience so she can run with it in 2016. Honestly, I think Hill would have a better chance at winning this year than O.

    The Dems have no bench thus Bill for the keynote. They don’t have a promising up and comer to highlight which is the norm for conventions. Obama is living in the past as that’s all he knows.

  • funwithknives

    even with all of Billy-Jeff’s warts, fibs and dalliances, and let’s mention DISBARMENT, added-in with what he’s done recently, ‘speaking true and then walking back’, that Barry would actually do ‘this thing’.

    How this plays out could be The Story Of This Election.
    *What Will Bill say?
    *Will he slide Barry A Big One?
    * How in hell is he gonna tie-in what presumed successes He Had with a continual loser’s record?
    He’s a fair speaker, but isn’t any method of conjoining a bit of a stretch?

    I don’t know about anyone else, but this night is one for BoilerMakers and snacks, at this residence.
    Unscripted, live, and full-blown Drama and Pathos are in store.
    What’s not to like here? None of it is made-up.

  • CarolT

    I don’t blame Bush for the economy, someone did in a post on this.. Yesterday I received a news alert from the WSJ that ruling authorities for Fannie & Freddie refuse to lower credit that Obama asked for to make it easier for people to buy a home. The dems under Clinton, Barney Frank, Dodd started it.

    I don’t watch dem convention but I will watch that night, I heard Elizabeth Warren is speaking after Clinton,it should be entertaining.