Clinton and Kerry

[erpowers]

It has come out that Bill Clinton secretly advised John Kerry during the 2004 presidential campaign. One of the things Clinton advised Kerry to do was to come out against gay marriage. Does anyone think Clinton may have tried to sabatoge John Kerry's campaign in order to make it easy for his wife to run in 2008. Is Clinton just trying to move the party to the right because he thinks that will help the party win?

[FSogol]

1. That's pretty cynical

Clinton wanted Kerry to win. His advice was more of a way to shore up support in the South and with African American Churches (who are against gay marriage for the most part).

[cornermouse]

2. No and no.

[madinmaryland]

3. I don't think that was the case.

Under no circumstances did he or anyone else in the Democratic Party want another four years of Bush. I think Clinton did want Kerry to win, though I am not sure about him advising Kerry to come out against gay marriage. I think it more to the affect of not taking a stand on gay marriage or to avoid it altogether.

[cestpaspossible]

4. To Kerry's credit, he rejected that advice.

google cache link

I'll give Clinton the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant the advice honestly.

[LittleClarkie]

5. Not so secretly. We know they talked.

and the DOMA thing was in Newsweek.

Clinton might have been right. Coming out for DOMA might have been politically good advice. I have doubts as to whether Kerry could have done that and make it sound believeable though.

And it is said that when Kerry got off the phone he told an aide, "That is something I could ever do" so it was a moot point.

I think it's more an indication of the way the political minds of Bill and Hillary work. It was probably sound advice, but pandering and dishonest as all hell. Maybe they can play that way, but apparently Kerry can't.

Thing is, I don't think Hillary even looks natural doing what she's doing right now. She's trying to reach out on value issues like pro-life and on violence in video games. But she's not Bill, and it just looks false when she tries to do what he did. The Right isn't going to buy it, and she's slowly pissing off her base on the left.

I think they were trying to help. But the styles were incompatable. Bill's comments during the election, esp. at the DNC, were very inspirational and well said.

So no, I don't think it was sabotage. If anything, they're trying that now with little sniping comments in the press about his campaign.

[cornermouse]

7. On one hand, I have to agree with your assessment of HIllary.

On the other hand, Kerry did make some very serious errors in his campaign.

[LittleClarkie]

10. And the Clintonistas had some good input in the way of TACTICS

I wish they'd have had more rapid response, for instance.

But when it came to Kerry's POLICY, I don't think he necessarily needed the help of the Clinton's.

IF he runs again, I do hope he learns from those serious errors.

From the way his campaign manager Donna Brazille talks, I wonder if Gore realizes what mistakes HE made during his campaign, and if he will correct them if HE decides to run again.

It would be interesting to see if those who wanna try again have learned anything. I'd like to test my theory that sometimes reinventing the wheel might not be the best choice. Can a former candidate run a better race the next time around.

One thing in their favor: our short-term memory.

[cornermouse]

17. IF he runs again, I also hope he learns.

We seriously need someone who is a little more...attentive, shall we say, to the American people and the disaster that Bush has forced on us.

Incidentally, my memory is not short. I'm taking names and remembering what they're doing now.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. Clinton offered him some other advice

Perhaps the gay marriage thing wasn't the best advice, but Clinton also told him that he needed to be more disciplined and stay on message. He did this in September I believe and around that time, also when Kerry started bringing in new strategists, his poll numbers went back to a dead heat.

[politicasista]

8. The campaign should have listened to Clinton

He knew how to win. :cry: :cry:

[Mass]

9. God no

I would have been mad if Kerry had come for the referendum against gay marriage.

In his first election, Clinton only got 42 % of the vote. With Perot being there, it was enough to win, but here it would not have been enough.

[politicasista]

11. But wouldn't have helped Kerry in the South?

I guess this is why Dems want to run a southerner. Too many Dixiecrats down here wouldn't understand a "northeastern liberal." It's too ignorant down here.

[cestpaspossible]

12. Kerry was unwilling to go against his core beliefs, even if it helped him

win. To me, this illustrates the fundamental difference between him and Clinton.

[Mass]

15. May be

but I prefer that he stayed honest rather than pandering to the South on this subject if it was what it took. It is not as if he had been campaigning for gay marriage.

May be people in the South wanted a more conservative candidate, but frankly, I am happy that he was not ready to go there.

[cestpaspossible]

20. I agree with you 100%

Kerry's integrity is one of the reasons I remain a Kerry loyalist.

[Deaniac20]

23. BULLSHIT

This idea that Perot took only votes away from conservatives is something fed to us by the elite CONSERVATIVE media to make Clinton look bad. It is pure bullshit, and don't fall for what Falwell would have you believe. We must first look at how different Perot was from Bush. He was more different from Bush than Clinton. He was a PRO CHOICE ACTIVIST. He was also the biggest anti NAFTA crusader, something both Clinton AND Bush AND Dole supported. He is where the nader liberals went before Nader became big, to oppose NAFTA. So liberals and Dems DID vote for him. That is to say yes he did take votes from Bush, but roughly the same as Clinton. Bush's numbers were at all time lows in 1992, so without Perot why would they have voted for him anyway? It was well under fifty, and with 2004 being the abberation with terrorism, so he would have lost. The exit polls showed in 92 that voters for Perot would have split equally between Clinton, Bush and NOT VOTING. For 96, Clinton was above 50 for almost the whole campaign. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/polls/cnn.usa.gallu... / Read those tracking polls, and http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/elections/natl.exit... read the exit polls. Go to the question "vote if perot was not running" Clinton STILL wins, 50-43, thus translating into 54-46 if 50 divided by 93. Read http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/polls/cnn.usa.gallu... and go to the question asking Perot voters their second choice, and Clinton wins in a landslide. Conservatives would obviously have you believe that Clinton wasn't really that popular. They are just whiners who cheat to win, and whine like hell if they don't.
On Kerry, I think he shoulda come out FOR UNIONS, against gay marriage.

[Mass]

24. I disagree

Perot helped Clinton, whatever you want to say. These polls were taken AFTER Perot campaigned against Bush. It touched conservative Republicans who in 96 voted for Buchanan in the primary.

They listened to Perot, decided first against Bush, and then decided between Clinton and Perot. Without Perot, they probably never would have listened to Clinton at all.

As for Kerry, he came consistently for civil unions and against gay marriage (as he did here in MA). Clinton advocated to support referendums that condemned civil unions as well as gay marriage (as in OH).

[Hippo_Tron]

25. Perot may have helped Clinton, but not as much as you suggest

Show me a single study not done by right wing hacks that says George Bush would've won in 1992 without Perot.

[elshiva]

26. Welcome to DU, Deaniac20!

:toast: :bounce:

[LittleClarkie]

13. Listen to him how, though

I think Bill knows how to get BILL elected. I'm not sure he and the Clintonistas are the best at getting others elected though.

For instance, Bill wanted Kerry to go more for economic issues. The thing is, this election was really more about 9/11 and national security. Kerry only made real headway when folks trusted him more on national security after the first debate.

I wish Kerry'd had a different campaign manager, that's for sure.

He could have used more Clinton-style tactics like rapid response, but not necessarily in what policy he emphasized. In some ways, I think people like Cahill held back Kerry's natural fighting spirit. Her and Shrum were afraid he'd come off too bitter or something. I would have preferred seeing him more angry and fired up, myself.

[Mass]

16. I agree with all you say here

[Catherine Vincent]

14. Bush stole the damn presidency. Everything else is moot.

[lojasmo]

18. He also publicly said Dean shouldn't be the nominee

because of his actions on domestic partnerships in vermont. I think clinton was supporting Kerry against Dean because he knew, as I did, that kerry would get killed in the generals....leaving 2008 open for H. Clinton.

Both clintons are artists of triangulation. I hope to never see either of them ascend any higher in the political structure than they already are.

[LittleClarkie]

19. Or he was saying that about Dean for the same reason told Kerry

to support DOMA. It's the same issue, and he must have known about he voter registrations in the churches, or at least known how the evangelicals would react.

Sounds like the same advice coming from two different angles.

You think he thought Kerry would get killed in the general election? Then he was wrong about that too. Dukakis got killed. Mondale got killed. McGovern got killed. 49 to 51 is not getting killed.

I get confused by talk of who Clinton supported though, because I thought he supported Clark. Kerry is New Dem, but only in his foreign policy, otherwise he's to liberal for the New Dems. Clark was probably to liberal as well, but I think Clark and Clinton were closer, being Rhodes scholars and all. I'm not even sure who the DLC candidate was supposed to be.

How influencial would it be for Clinton to back this canididate or that. Does he sway that many?

Something else about the DLC (which I guess I bring up because I associate Clinton with it), how often do they put people on their sites to claim they are New Dems, when the person was never notified that they'd done so, as in the case of Obama. How many on their list never asked to be there. Makes me wonder sometimes. I don't see many in the party as centrist as Clinton. Sometimes I think he IS the DLC.

[lojasmo]

21. No, he said Dean didn't "deserve the nomination"

Fucking pig.

Heh. I just saw my sig line under that post.

[wyldwolf]

27. that quote from Clinton must have escaped me

I'd certainly like to see the quote in context and perhaps read the details leading up to the quote.

I don't think an influential Democrat should publically endorse or discourage endorsements for a candidate in the primaries.

If Clinton said this, he shouldn't have.

The same way Gore should not have endorsed Howard Dean.

[Laurab]

22. Help the party win I'd say

Although I'm not sure it would have helped, and I'm glad JK didn't take his advice. He stayed true to himself, and it's one of the things that impressed me about him.

For all his faults, I think Bill Clinton is a good hearted man. I don't think for a minute he would have tried sabatoging a campaign, and subjecting us to 4 more years of hell for any reason.