The Clinton Conundrum

A number of my friends have asked me recently, in frank bewilderment, why I don't support Sen. Clinton. And in trying to figure out why they are surprised by that, I finally asked the magic question: Did you also support or like Bill Clinton?

Of the three I asked, all three said yes, and looked at me like I had two heads.

I don't know if this would hold true if I asked more of them, but if it does, it explains a great deal to me. Because I never voted for Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton has  always been representative of what I hate about the Democratic Party: How it panders to the middle, climbs happily into bed with whatever corporate interest waves a big check in its face, the whole favor/payback/buddy-buddy system of making deals, the Washington-centric view of America.

I felt protective of Bill Clinton during the whole impeachment thing, but it was more that the Republicans were dragging the nation into turmoil out of partisan loathing of the man, rather than that I liked him any more than before.

After Bush took the White House, I missed the hell out of Bill Clinton, and even felt fondness for him in the intervening years. That lasted until he hit the campaign trail for Sen. Clinton, when it took him about ten minutes to burn up any goodwill I had for him with his pugnacious attitude.

Of course, I  judge Sen. Clinton separately from her husband. I think she is head and shoulders above him, and while she doesn't appeal to me on a personal level and I would never get excited about her as a candidate, I don't think she'd be a bad president -- certainly better than the last two four six eight.

But it's irrelevant to me whether I "like" the president of the United States or not. I would say that either Obama or Clinton would allow me not to cringe in shame in front of the world everytime either one opened their mouth, and that's a good thing.

But just as I never voted for Bill Clinton, I'll only give my vote to Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee and my state is genuinely in play. But that's very usual for me; I have almost never voted for a major party candidate at all -- the last time was Mondale and Ferraro, until I voted for John Kerry in the last election, and even then, I only did that because Howard Dean asked his supporters to do so, and because I liked John Edwards. I'm not a major party, mainstream kind of voter. And the Democractic party has always been too conservative, pro-big-business for me.

I want to believe in change, because I don't like what we've had in my adult life. From the Reagan years to today, I feel betrayed by and ashamed of every president this country has had. By supporting Obama, I feel I'm making a huge vote for something else, something not within that framework. The fact that people respond to Obama matters more to this country than his presidency would, although there's the added bonus that he might actually do some of the things he wants to do. But even if he doesn't, the most important thing to me is not what happens to him, or to Washington, DC, but what happens to Americans, in our hearts and minds, in our daily lives.

I don't necessarily support Obama because I'm convinced he can effect the changes he wants to, although I think it's possible that he can. I support him because the groundswell of support for him, and its passionate nature, send a strong message that Americans can still be galvanized by hope, can still care about the political process, that something unexpected can still make us catch fire and fight for our country and our heritage as Americans.

Now, I suppose that fifteen of my friends who like Sen. Clinton will post or email telling me they hated Bill Clinton, and my whole theory will fall apart, but right now I'm thinking their surprise at my lack of support for her candidacy comes because they don't understand what I want from a presidential candidate, and for America. They are more mainstream Democrats, liberal but not at all independent/ornery in their politics, and as far as I can tell, they supported Bill Clinton.

And there's nothing wrong with that. This is their country and they should fight to make it be the nation they want it to be. But if they really understood my politics, and the candidates I've supported in the past, they'd never be surprised I'm not in Sen. Clinton's camp. It would be very odd if I were.

Comments

[Red]

Well, I'm one of the 'friends' that did vote for, and rather liked, Bill Clinton. I felt that he also got younger people involved in politics. Of course, that seemed to dry up and blow away a few years into his presidency.

This is like nothing I've ever experienced in my life. Last week, I was getting a haircut, and talking with a very nice, middled aged Vietnamese woman, when she mentioned having a son in Texas. I asked her if he planned to vote and she said yes. She asked me if I'd voted on Super Tuesday and asked who I voted for. Before I could answer, she leaned in and said, "Obama?" When I said yes, she lit up and said, "Me too!"

She then proceeded to talk me into a dye job, all the while chattering on about Obama and the effect that he's had on people, young and old alike. Best 100+ bucks I ever spent.

It's things like this, ordinary people so engaged and excited about politics, that has me rooting for Barack Obama. If he can inspire everyday people like us, imagine what he can do for this country. And isn't it about time we had something to believe in? Isn't it past time?

[Emily S]

well, I wanted Gore to run and I don't get the excitement about Obama. To me, he'd be a great candidate in about 8 years (after 2 terms as Gore V-P but of course that's not going to happen...) That would leave HClinton by default. I thought BClinton was a darn fine President (except for that whole hound dog thing), but I think he'd be a disaster as "first husband". So that would mean Obama..

BUT the most important thing if you want this country to head back on anything approaching the right track, is to vote for whichever Democrat gets the nomination.

[KathyF]

I sorta felt the same way, although it took me longer to fall out of love with Bill. If you google "my love affair with Bill Clinton" you'll read all about my sordid voting history with Bill Clinton.

[Barbara Saunders]

The "hope" marketing just misses the mark with me. I don't dislike Obama; however, so many people seem to support him for the tautological reason that he "inspires a groundswell of support." That, I don't get!

[ol cranky]

"I don't necessarily support Obama because I'm convinced he can effect the changes he wants to, although I think it's possible that he can. I support him because the groundswell of support for him, and its passionate nature, send a strong message that Americans can still be galvanized by hope, can still care about the political process, that something unexpected can still make us catch fire and fight for our country and our heritage as Americans."

I have to agree with Pundit at Recovering Liberal when he says:

"Perhaps, in a few years, Senator Obama may mature to the level of becoming the person we all would like to be President of the United States, but he simply isn’t there yet, and Senator Clinton is. Today, we need that experience in the White House, and Senator Clinton brings that to the table."

There is a very real possibility that all the charisma, excitement, and desire to do the right thing in the world doesn't give him the knowledge and ability to actually get the job done. The stakes are too high this time around to take a chance on someone who hasn't quite proven himself yet. If Obama fails as we are likely to face an emboldened and bitter conservative movement that makes today's "africanized bee nasty" right wing seem like harmless bumble-bees. They will be galvanized and motivated to make sure we evil liberals know how "Christian" and punitive this country via the WASPy fundamentalist theocracy they will enact when they regain power. The damage that can be done if they regain control in 2012 will take us back generations (and will be felt for generations to come).

I don't particularly care for Hilary but I think she is, and has always been, a target and polarizing figure is because people are really afraid of not only what she has the potential to deliver but how the detractors & those who will actively undermine her will be exposed for their willingness to hurt the country just because they hate her.

[ol cranky]

Gosh, my typing is as bad as my grammar, punctuation and penchant for run-on sentences *blush*

This: If Obama fails as we are likely to face an emboldened and bitter conservative movement

should be this: If Obama fails, we are likely to face an emboldened and bitter conservative movement

[Shari Mann]

I was so very glad to see that you were for Obama, Christie; because I am too, and for many of the same reasons, and we hadn't discussed it at all. I felt vindicated. Do you feel powerful? You should.

The other factor, not mentioned, is that rather a lot of people would vote for McCain before they'd vote for Hilary.

Shari

[Kevin Larson]

Ok? What is this vast experience every other person is ascribing to Hillary? She has NOT been appointed to any kind of position where she ACTUALLY helped two warring nations come together (something she says happened in Ireland). And you know she did not. She knows it as well. And I bet she hopes most of her supporters CONTINUE to forget that not-so-tiny detail.

She has not been Secretary of State where she could be in the kind of position to broker peace treaties and discuss (in a tangible, serious way) foreign affairs with other leaders.

She was a Senator of New York State. The junior senator if I recall...

She was the first lady. Never the President. Only the first lady.

She got to go on a lot of foreign trips with her husband. She was the smiling and cerebral ambassador for our country.

She even attempted to get universal health care for the USA. A laudable and highly noble endeavor. Which met with such furious rancor that I'm surprised that ANYONE thinks the situation has changed enough to allow them to think she'll get it passed this time around. Folks either still love her or still hate her. That is NOT a recipe for co-operation. It is a recipe for a S-T-A-L-M-A-T-E. Something that plagued the Clinton administration for years.

Look, I am not knocking her ability to think. Or her ability to get some things done. Or her ability to be a politician. I am only saying that she doesn't ACTUALLY have all the experience she's laying claim to!

And besides, if being the wife or the husband of someone made you JUST as qualified. Then... I'd be able sing opera in five languages (I cannot...), one of my buddies would be able to do Dentistry, and another, well, she could fly jets. And since we know that THAT isn’t possible. Why does anyone think that Hillary is by default, Bill-light?

Folks, you are NOT getting two Clintons for the price of one. The nation damn near went to war with itself when that last "first lady" tried to grab the presidential reigns from time to time. Do you think it will be any different when Bill is invited to partake of the presidency again? Me thinks not.

Obama isn’t perfect but he's heads and shoulders above most of the politicians I've read about, voted for, screamed and cursed at, and lost faith in.

And even if he only gets some of the things accomplished that he wants done, just imagine that...

Obama supporter I am. Hillary believer I am not.

Oh, and this is a great blog!