A serious Question for Democrat Party Voters?

RMNIXON · 02-24-2007, 03:17 PM

Now I want you to be honest here so I am going to be as polite and diplomatic about this as possible. Please don't make this another partisan attack thread.

The Question:

Do you suffer as a voter from Clinton Fatigue?

I remember when Bush first ran for President and people were saying, "Oh No another Bush in the Whitehouse" and "does that family think they own the place?"

But consider that Bush Sr. was only President for four years and not very visible durring the Reagan years. Not like Cheney. George W. was not visible at all on a national scale other than a governor of Texas. So in a way he was very fresh and new in 2000. McCain was more the old warhorse of the party.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand was very visible for eight years of the Clinton Presidency, much more than First Ladies Barbara and Laura Bush. Very much a part of policy. And as a New York Senator she has been very visible on the national scene not unlike a Kennedy. And it has been a stepping stone to a Presidential run since she took her Congressional oath. We all know that.

So beyond any personality and scandal bagage concerns is it much more appealing to have someone like Obama take center stage as someone new?

Scrum · 02-24-2007, 03:20 PM

You may be on to something in the comparison to Obama.
I think having a clean (

) person in the WH could be a good thing. I think much of America ready for a real change.

I could be bias though since I don't like Hillary.

RMNIXON · 02-24-2007, 03:37 PM

Obviously from the Republican side I delight in the Hollywood Feud.

But when you stop and think about it from someone like Geffen's point of view you know it can't be Hillary's politics. They know she is a liberal, even more than Bill Clinton. So the temtation to back another horse must be something? A personal dislike is in the mix. But is that in part because even Dems have had enough of Clinton's? If anything you want a President who will not screw up your political majorities in the House and Senate. Hillary polarizes people! Now she is out trying to sell what a great guy Bill is.... Well Bill is not the candidate lady!

It will be much harder fro the GOP to thow rocks at Obama because he has so little history and comes across as such a likable person.

Scrum · 02-24-2007, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

It will be much harder fro the GOP to thow rocks at Obama because he has so little history and comes across as such a likable person.

Agreed and I think that holds quite a bit of appeal for many people.

He's almost, bear with me, like a McCain before the 2K election. I know McCain had more experience and a military record, but he wasn't real well known and his charisma and "straight talk" helped him quite a bit. Now that he's so deep into politics people don't look at him the same. The same could happen to Obama if he doesn't end up as president or vp in this cycle given his popularity.

JaJae · 02-24-2007, 03:49 PM

I think everyone is bringing up a lot of really good points in this thread.

During Bill's term the big joke was that Hillary was the one actually running the country. Overall, Bill did a good job as president. He made a few key mistakes that I'll continue to throw in his face, but overall he did well compared to both Bush's. He got re-elected based on the quality of his work, not because someone was afraid to vote for the other guy... That's something both Bush's can't say.

With that in mind though I feel as though Hillary was already in the White House and she's been a tired part of the Democratic media spokesperson. Personally I'm tired of Hillary and of Bill.

I would much prefer a new face... Obama is where it's at in the Democratic party. He's a fresh politician with a lot of charisma. That's how Bush beat Gore and the Republicans would have to really muster up a good candidate to beat Obama. I don't know if they have anyone who could do it right now whereas Hillary is a crap shoot.

Jas0n · 02-24-2007, 03:57 PM

Why is it that people seem to think we need someone who is a complete n00bcake running the country? That seems to me like a really bad line of thinking.

(Along these lines: well, General Motors isn't selling cars like we wish it would, fellow shareholders, so instead of finding a well-qualified management team to turn things around, let's just pull some nobody off of the street and put him in charge. Oh, hey! Just so we can play the race card if people continue to buy Fords, let's get a black guy!)

Scrum · 02-24-2007, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by Jas0n

Why is it that people seem to think we need someone who is a complete n00bcake running the country? That seems to me like a really bad line of thinking.

(Along these lines: well, General Motors isn't selling cars like we wish it would, fellow shareholders, so instead of finding a well-qualified management team to turn things around, let's just pull some nobody off of the street and put him in charge. Oh, hey! Just so we can play the race card if people continue to buy Fords, let's get a black guy!)

Because people who have been in politics for a really long time tend to be more corrupt.

I thought you libertarians were usually into that sort of thinking?

It's not rocket science and a lot of it is delegation.

Also, it's not like Obama just fell off the turnip truck.

JaJae · 02-24-2007, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by Jas0n

Why is it that people seem to think we need someone who is a complete n00bcake running the country? That seems to me like a really bad line of thinking.

I don't think you need to be a career politician to be a good president or a good leader. Reagan and Jesse Ventura are examples of that. I would rather a n00bcake be president than someone I know is corrupt, unethical and tainted by years of dirty politics to get ahead.

Scrum · 02-24-2007, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

I don't think you need to be a career politician to be a good president or a good leader. Reagan is an example of that. I would rather a n00bcake be president than someone I know is corrupt, unethical and tainted by years of dirty politics to get ahead.

Good point as well.

6SpeedTA95 · 02-24-2007, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

I think everyone is bringing up a lot of really good points in this thread.

During Bill's term the big joke was that Hillary was the one actually running the country. Overall, Bill did a good job as president. He made a few key mistakes that I'll continue to throw in his face, but overall he did well compared to both Bush's. He got re-elected based on the quality of his work, not because someone was afraid to vote for the other guy... That's something both Bush's can't say.

With that in mind though I feel as though Hillary was already in the White House and she's been a tired part of the Democratic media spokesperson. Personally I'm tired of Hillary and of Bill.

I would much prefer a new face... Obama is where it's at in the Democratic party. He's a fresh politician with a lot of charisma. That's how Bush beat Gore and the Republicans would have to really muster up a good candidate to beat Obama. I don't know if they have anyone who could do it right now whereas Hillary is a crap shoot.

I disagree on some of your bill clinton points...however, I'll try not to digress...

I think Obama is very likable but I do not think hillary or obama are electable. I think however, that richardson from NM could get elected or Henry from Oklahoma (even though he hasn't announced his running).

SoFlaJDM · 02-24-2007, 05:16 PM

i really don't think anything will matter after the primaries... the obama supporters will back hillary if she wins, and vise versa not good news for the GOP

RMNIXON · 02-24-2007, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Agreed and I think that holds quite a bit of appeal for many people.

He's almost, bear with me, like a McCain before the 2K election. I know McCain had more experience and a military record, but he wasn't real well known and his charisma and "straight talk" helped him quite a bit. Now that he's so deep into politics people don't look at him the same. The same could happen to Obama if he doesn't end up as president or vp in this cycle given his popularity.

Word is that McCain and Romney will duke it out and Giuliani will come from behind and win the nomination. A possible? He has a better personality that McCain and Romney is playing too far to the christian right while being a Mormon which is the goofy stepchild of Christianity in America.

RMNIXON · 02-24-2007, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by Jas0n

(Along these lines: well, General Motors isn't selling cars like we wish it would, fellow shareholders, so instead of finding a well-qualified management team to turn things around, let's just pull some nobody off of the street and put him in charge. Oh, hey! Just so we can play the race card if people continue to buy Fords, let's get a black guy!)

Yes, but in politics the insiders tend to run things the same old bureaucratic ways that screw thing up in the first place. The government does not compete, that is why it needs to be shaken up now and then.

motivez · 02-24-2007, 07:44 PM

The right wont turn out for Guiliani. Romney's mormon background will be a great cause for concern from the evangelical movement.

McCain is doing a good job of becoming what he hated in 2000 though, maybe after he gets done selling his soul and ditching all of the credibility he had 8 years ago he'll get the nomination he so desires.

thatguyoverthere · 02-25-2007, 02:52 AM

Great thread, some good points made here.

I think Obama is pretty much like a blank slate, so it's easy to project your own image of an ideal candidate on him, whether he actually lives up to it or not. I think we as Americans are also looking for some sort of national unity again, and Obama on some level represents us coming together. He also comes across as a strong, confident leader when he speaks, and that doesn't hurt.

I know that some Democrats do have Clinton fatigue. I've talked to them. They may not dislike Hillary, they're just sick and tired of the vicious right wing attacks on her that have continued from 1992 up to today, and don't really want to deal with that endless bleating again.

As for Obama's experience, it's a double edged sword. Bush Sr. and Dick Cheney had about as long political resumes as you could find, and they weren't that great. But, I do understand having concern about Obama's inexperience and I have to agree. Maybe the presidency is not the best place for on the job training.

So, I'm split. I like Obama, but IMO concerns about his inexperience are justified. I think Hillary would be a pretty moderate president and I don't question that she's fairly well qualified for the job, but I'm totally against the whole "Bush then Clinton then Bush then Clinton" presidents in a row like that. America shouldn't be a monarchy, or controlled by two families like the mob.

motivez · 02-25-2007, 10:40 AM

If she were to win, it'd mean that our country would have either a Clinton or a Bush in the White House for 24 years minimum. I honestly think the country is ready for someone new that doesn't have a lot of the baggage, which is why Obama has become such a genuine phenomena.

His lack of experience though is the main issue, but if someone like Clark or whatever was his VP it'd be a great ticket. I think at this point Clark has waited too long to get into the race.. but maybe he'll be someone's VP pick.

Kytro · 02-25-2007, 04:53 PM

Being a good politician with experience is really just manipulation and people management. It isn't like most politicians are experts that know what they are doing.

RMNIXON · 02-25-2007, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

The right wont turn out for Guiliani. Romney's mormon background will be a great cause for concern from the evangelical movement.

I don't know about that? They said the same thing about social moderate Arnold in Culifornia and he had a huge recall victory and re-election in Blue State Left Coast Land. You don't do that without the base turnout. It may depend on who he runs against?

6SpeedTA95 · 02-25-2007, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

The right wont turn out for Guiliani. Romney's mormon background will be a great cause for concern from the evangelical movement.

McCain is doing a good job of becoming what he hated in 2000 though, maybe after he gets done selling his soul and ditching all of the credibility he had 8 years ago he'll get the nomination he so desires.

I disagree I've been asking folks at work (the far righters) if they'd vote for him and they all say "if it keeps hillary from getting elected I'd hold my breath and vote"

Thorgrim · 02-25-2007, 10:47 PM

I miss the Clinton years...and since every GOP candidate has promised hard right-wing judges that want to legislate christianist morality from the bench and give the president broad new powers, I'll take Hillary for $1000, Alex