Is Bill's involvement with HRC's campaign supposed to foster the notion

[wtmusic]

that as a man he will lend "strength" to her presidency?

If so, it will backfire. If anything, in some minds, he is making her appear more dependent--he should back off and let her succeed on her own merits.

IMO.

[robbedvoter]

1. No.

[niyad]

2. you know, it fascinates me--judith dean was criticized for NOT participating in her husband's

campaign, bill is criticized FOR participating.

[wtmusic]

4. How would she have helped Howard's chances? nt

[MADem]

11. She was smart, sweet, and had a winning personality--though she was a bit quiet.

People WANTED to meet her. She could have helped whip up participation. Her "unpolished" quality was actually a winner. Had she exploited it, who knows? She had a practice, though, and it was an active one.

A spouse or surrogate enables the candidate to almost be in two places at once. The spouse carries the message, and delivers it.

[Deep13]

3. No, that is far more complicated than the actual plan.

People like Bill. If he stumps for Hillary, maybe they will like her too.

[wtmusic]

7. Stumping is fine

but when he's tempted to defend/attack he should keep his mouth shut.

[Deep13]

10. Why would he keep his mouth shut?

You know that the purpose of these campaigns is to win, right?

[wtmusic]

12. From a strategy point of view

by not letting her defend herself he will create the impression *in some minds* that she is incapable of doing it.

Playing up her strengths is another thing altogether.

[MADem]

14. She is defining herself to those who will SUPPORT her

He is keeping her detractors in "perpetual whine about Bill" mode.

It's genius. And it's been done before--SUCCESSFULLY.

[MADem]

13. If you do not support Senator Clinton, and his conduct is making you angry,

he is DOING his JOB.

He's drawing heat, as I said downthread.

[durrrty libby]

17. You don't get it. As a Hillary supporter I would be angry if Bill wasn't out there

doing everything possible to get her elected

The only people mad at him and spouting all the unbecoming of a former president

nonsense are supporters of other candidates

Go Bill

[AtomicKitten]

5. By fighting her battles, he is diminishing her perceived efficacy.

[MADem]

16. That is how YOU feel, but you do not support her.

The strategy is working. You're focused on the wrong target.

[durrrty libby]

18. lol What a complete and total crock of shit

[AtomicKitten]

20. The truth often seems that way to some.

[Orangepeel]

6. No. Hillary is not perceived to be weak.

That's not her problem. People who don't like her -- either for legitimate reasons or sexist reasons, take your pick -- tend to criticize her for being too cold, too calculating, to strident, too bitchy.

Personally, I like Hillary. I'm not supporting her in the primary, but I admire her for being ambitious and smart and I think she'd be a fine president. I also like that Bill is campaigning hard for her. I don't think he's doing it because he wants to be co-president again. I think he is doing it because he loves and admires her.

But, it seems to me, based on what happened in NH, that Hillary's problem is that many people don't think she is feminine enough. As an example of that, there is an editorial floating around here somewhere where some woman complains that she and her friends hate Hillary because she is not "campaigning as a woman."

[MADem]

8. Well, that little turd Dick Morris infers that his job is to "draw heat"

away from her, so that she can march on smartly.

Just as she did for him with the "Tammy Wynette/baking cookies" business.

The goal is to get the opposition RABID, and focused on the less significant, but more obvious target.

He might actually have a small point--see, you're doing it; you're focusing on the spouse and not the candidate. Now, if you don't intend to vote for her ANYWAY, that's good for her campaign that you're doing that--you spend all your time railing about him, and her supporters will know you're "against her," and be even more sympathetic towards her.

Plus, her supporters for the most part remember him FONDLY. While detractors carp, she continues to go out and campaign undisturbed. And can almost be in two places at once!

Personally, I think his job is to rattle Obama's cage and get the guy all discombobulated. And he's doing a brilliant job of it, too. Obama does nothing but whine about Bill--well, that is NOT true, but the media is playing it like that's ALL he is doing.

And perception IS reality.

The subtext is as follows: If Obama can't handle an ex-president who's an older, white haired man who has had heart surgery, how's he gonna handle The Grand Ayatullah or Vladimir Putin? How's he going to juggle China and Cuba?

Paint him with the WEAK and TESTY paint. From twenty paces, he'll look like an angry wet hen, no matter WHAT he does.

That's the tactic, from where I sit, anyway.

[wtmusic]

19. It's somewhat obtuse to think that

it's "good for her campaign that you're doing that--you spend all your time railing about him, and her supporters will know you're "against her," and be even more sympathetic towards her."

Sideways-reverse psychology? :crazy:

I'm thinking more about the moderates who might have voted for W, realize they made a big mistake, but have second thoughts about voting for a woman because of a perceived lack of strength. To win those voters I would want to keep Bill more than an arm's length away.

I am leaning towards Obama but I agree with your assessment of his "testiness" and it's one of his less presidential qualities.

[MADem]

You are free to disagree with the analysis.

I think it is spot-on, myself. It's worked before. The national psyche is an interesting thing. The national memory is short, too!

Clinton did that "comeback kid" thing in NH while everyone was yelling at Hillary for everything from Genifer Flowers to her hairstyle to her eyebrows to the Tammy Wynette-cookies business. They carped at the wrong target. Foamed at the mouth, too. And that is helping HER now--because that's where people saw just how well she could take a punch and come back swinging.

All Bill has to do is keep her detractors at bay until she gets the nomination, assuming she does.

Once she gets the nomination (or has so many delegates that no one can touch her), the tactic can surely change, if need be.

Right now, the focus is 2025 delegates. If Bill can run interference so the Senator can rack those up, he's done his duty.

[MADem]

9. Apologies for my double click...

[oasis]

15. Bill's presence reminds voters of the prosperous years of his administration.

And they just might want a second helping.:9

[wtmusic]

21. You're right -- he definitely brings that to the table

and it's possible that if she wins the nomination he will back off. She would be attempting to attract a completely different demographic after that point -- moderates who may have even voted for W.

[LSparkle]

22. I know he can't help it, but he ought to back off

He's a former President -- that makes him different from the other spouses. Have Elizabeth Edwards or Michelle Obama received HALF the coverage his remarks and interviews have? He ought to use the emeritus bully pulpit for things like his foundation and stay away from attack politics. I have to admit that I think Poppy Bush conducted himself better when Pissypants was running -- he'd comment when asked, but didn't go out of his way to get involved in the campaign on behalf of his son.

[wtmusic]

23. Except for being the heir of Reagan's legacy

Poppy was one of the most tolerable Republicans of the last century. An actual, dyed-in-the-wool war hero who had an iota or two of statesmanship.

What happened to those genes is anyone's guess.

[MADem]

24. Not unless he wants her to lose. See post 8. This is calculated.

"Former Presidents" don't go home to the farm to die anymore. Look at Jimmy Carter--he's gotten in some dust ups since he left office, and he doesn't back down from them, either.

Media coverage isn't Clinton's 'fault,' either. But he'd be a FOOL not to exploit it. If you're looking for 'fair' you need to go play baseball. Politics, and coverage, aren't 'fair.' Ask John Edwards.

He shouldn't be pushing his foundation while his wife is running for President--unless he wants her to LOSE.

He should be stumping for her like crazy, drawing flak, and getting people who "Hate Hillary" to focus their attention on him, and complain about his behavior as 'unseemly' or 'distracting' or, dare I say 'unfair.' That shit only resonates with people who dislike Senator Clinton, anyway. People who like her laugh like hell at the carping and whining, and say 'Hey, you bring an Oprah, I bring a Bill! That's the CHICAGO way!" Which IS pretty funny, considering that HRC was born in IL and BO represents the joint!

:rofl:

While detractors complain about Bill, the Senator can continue to consolidate her base of support with personal appearances and targeted campaign tactics without a bunch of negative press about HER.

Jimmy Carter got elected with BILLY as a brother. Sometimes, a "distractor" is useful.

It sure gets the opponents busy griping about the wrong target!