AP SOURCES: KEY ROLE FOR CLINTON AT DEM CONVENTION
Source: AP
WASHINGTON (AP) Former President Bill Clinton will have a marquee role in this summer's Democratic National Convention, where he will make a forceful case for President Barack Obama's re-election and his economic vision for the country, several Obama campaign and Democratic party officials said Sunday.
The move gives the Obama campaign an opportunity to take advantage of the former president's immense popularity and remind voters that a Democrat was in the White House the last time the American economy was thriving.
Obama personally asked Clinton to speak at the convention and place Obama's name in nomination, and Clinton enthusiastically accepted, officials said. Clinton speaks regularly to Obama and to campaign officials about strategy.
Clinton's prominent role at the convention will also allow Democrats to embrace party unity in a way that is impossible for Republican rival Mitt Romney.
Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-sources-key-role-clinton-dem-convention
MADem
(135,425 posts)Beacool
(30,247 posts)I would say that he and she have plenty of star power.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)n/t
MindMover
(5,016 posts)you must be smokin some of that purple kush ....
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)for Hilary in 2016!
MindMover
(5,016 posts)far from it, its some purple mountain majesty sheeet ... Hillary wants nothing to do with the Presidency
and anyway, politicians don't make these kind of deals, our .0005%er plutocrats make these decisions
... Politicians are just told to recite the plutocrat mantra and march to the beat ...
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)What deal can they make? Hillary would've been free to run in 2016 with or without Obama's support. It's unlikely Biden will run, considering his age and lack of major appeal, and the Democratic nominee is selected through primary status nowadays, so, it's not like Obama could promise her the nomination. Sure, he could throw support behind her, but who are we kidding - Hillary in 2016 would be the favorite with, or without, Obama's support.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)to the 2016 Election. I don't know what other Dems have plans to run in 2016, But Pres O's endorsement will mean a lot among Dems.......
At least, that's what I think.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)And the Clintons would never ask for it.
aquart
(69,014 posts)SHE doesn't need a "deal." HE does.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,580 posts)She does not want to be President or anything else in our government.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It would be a far better fit.
We need HRC in a position where she can't push for any more wars.
scheming daemons
(25,487 posts)You don't want to appoint a judge and have them on the bench for only a decade or so.
We need to appoint YOUNG liberal judges so they will be on the bench for decades.
Can't appoint a 65-year-old judge. Just can't. Bad idea.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)I don't hear that sentiment very often. But, I think you are absolutely correct.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)It's not her thing. I'm still hoping that after some rest she reconsiders 2016.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Power for life and no need to compromise. And it's a place where she could focus on the GOOD side of her agenda...the support of domestic social justice...not the evil side-her commitment to a "bear any burden, fight any foe" foreign policy. That policy led only one place for JFK. It could only to the same place for HRC-and that place isn't a place where there can be anything that's good for women or children.
The first woman president should be a REAL feminist---which means a person committed to a non-interventionist foreign policy. You can't help women or children by the use of military force...and no women anywhere could benefit from missile strikes against Iran.
The first woman president should be someone like Barbara Lee...or Bella Abzug-not someone who's whole purpose in political life is trying to rehabilitate the notion that war can be liberal.
emilyg
(22,742 posts)Occulus
(20,599 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/07/ia-dems-want-hillary-in-16-gop-picture-less-clear.html
Raleigh, N.C. Hillary Clinton continues to have a dominant lead in Iowa Democrats preferences for their 2016 presidential nominee almost three years before actual candidates will begin chowing down on cobs of corn. The straw poll on the Republican side is much closer, with three candidates locked at the top and two others in double digits.
Clinton tops Vice President Joe Biden 60-18, with no one else even approaching 5%. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren each have 3%, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner are at 1%, and Maryland Gov. Martin OMalley and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick register almost no support. 14% favor someone else or are not sure.
The victors of the two most recent caucuses, Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, are tied at 17%, with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie right on their tails at 16%, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul at 11%, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio at 10%, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 8%, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan at 6%, and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin each at 4%, with only 8% not behind a candidate.
No deal was made because no deal is necessary. Secretary of State enters 2016 as a prohibitive favorite, and no there is no comparison with 2008.
longship
(40,416 posts)This is rubbish. The idea that anybody has any idea who the 2016 nominees would be at this point is ludicrous.
The US is one of the only countries where the chief executive is elected with an interminably long, multi-year process which wears down the populace who quickly get tired of all the politics. No wonder so few people vote. By the election day people are so worn out and pissed off about the years long nomination process, they stay home.
The major media love the game and want it to happen perpetually and permanently. So now, even before the 2012 campaign actually starts heating up, people start flapping their gums about 2016, as if they actually know what's going on.
It's idiocy.
Relax. Take a breath. Let's get Obama reelected this year. Then, let's take a break on presidential elections.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)As I said, it's silly to say anything about 2016 now. What is this? Permanent, eternal presidential campaigning? Isn't it bad enough that this time it went on for two whole fucking years?
Anyway, Hillary has signaled that she's out of government after this.
I hate this kind of thing. It IS rubbish. Nobody has any idea who the nominees will be in four years. Pretending they do is only doing just that. And from Hillary's own mouth, it will certainly not be her.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)or even WANTING to deal to get a speaking spot is ridiculous.
I agree that discussion about 2016 is a waste of time and there are no 'deals' being made.
Having said that the article I cited did create a stir among campaign pols, and I got a call from one and asked if I had seen it. Her favorability numbers continue to go up, and not just in Iowa;
In the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll, Clintons favorable rating stands at 65 percent, the highest mark that the former first lady and current Secretary of State has ever reached in the long history of that poll. Just 27 percent of respondents viewed Clinton unfavorably in the Post-ABC poll.
Which, IMHO, make the idea of a 'deal' for a convention speech even more ridiculous.
longship
(40,416 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_January_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008#Iowa
Senator Clinton never had a commanding lead in Iowa.
Moreover in other states she would typically have about 42% which was a big lead over a split field but never gained.
It also was a lot closer to 2000 when President Clinton's term was still somewhat in the public's memory.
She would expect to do very well in NH again so if SOS Clinton's numbers were to continue to be this high in Iowa she would almost certainly not attract a determined opponent who would be willing to work for a year in early primary states.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Chelsea 2016
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)xchrom
(108,903 posts)And a better communicator than the repukes St. Ronny.
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)He is so smart and will tell it like it is.
agent46
(1,262 posts)complimenting the opposition and recognizing all their hard work and expertise.
aquart
(69,014 posts)You never noticed?
msongs
(67,394 posts)MindMover
(5,016 posts)and a few more that I cannot remember right this second....but your sarcasm is not altogether unwarranted....
emulatorloo
(44,112 posts)BootinUp
(47,139 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=783633
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)cr8tvlde
(1,185 posts)as she still has "Bill Power" and she is ready and knows it. This time, however, the party must come to her and make their peace and offer a lot. She'll do it, regardless of what she says now if they draft her. Anyway, it would inappropriate to indicate that ambition while still holding on of the top government positions.
And, no, she's not too old. She's like fine wine. Go, Hillary, even if it is kicking and screaming. No one in that party has the intelligence, moxy, and name recognition...and she's everlasting a competitor and leaderl
eridani
(51,907 posts)Though I'm betting that the Obama campaign will take countermeasures to prevent that.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Also, this is a nod to those in the party who still harbor strong feelings about Hillary 2008. Its a good gesture both politically and personally.
adigal
(7,581 posts)corkhead
(6,119 posts)it's only fair.
madokie
(51,076 posts)Rules!
The pukies did to Clinton exactly what they're doing to Obama.
I remember watching President Clinton on one of the Sunday morning talk shows and they were talking about what all that Clinton was able to do as President and Bill looked at the camera and said and I did it without one, let me reiterate he said, I did it without one, pointing his finger in the air, republicon vote. I loved it.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)It's when he is trying to go overboard and be everything to everyone that he loses his stride.
He is a mesmerizing speaker when he is focused, that's for damned sure.
I don't think the GOP party will achieve unity this year, not at the convention, not before the election, not before Thanksgiving.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Now he needs Bill, now he values his knowledge and advice. That's not the tune he was playing back in 2008 when he thought that Reagan was transformational in ways that Bill was not. It's no so easy, isn't it president Obama?
How ironic...........
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)In spite of the petulant behavior of both Clintons during the 2008 Dem primary, then candidate and now Pres O has been nothing both gracious toward both of them, grace a virtue neither of them have. In fact, it was Pres O that gave HRC the foreign policy experience she embarrassingly claimed to have but did not.
Regarding Bill Clinton's "knowledge and advice," in a matter of about one week recently (links upthread), BC advocated for the Keystone Pipeline, said he supported extending ALL the Bush tax cuts, and praised Rmoney's vulture capitalism - all contrary to and stepping on Pres O's message. Whose side is he on exactly because I can't tell sometimes.
Your "they're the most popular people on the planet," a not too subtle dig at Pres O, is not only childish but ridiculous. Take a look at the Pres O's rallies, then and now, and get back to us.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Who is kidding who? Obama needs the Clintons right now far more than they need him. "Gracious" my rear end!!!
As for foreign policy experience, Obama had none. Oh, sorry, his entire experience was having lived in Indonesia from the ages of 6 to 10.
I hope that Obama wins because a Republican in the WH would not be good for the nation, but he's barely ahead of Romney at the moment.
As for Obama's rallies, he's "likable enough", as he crassly said about Hillary in NH; but likability does not necessarily translate into the ability to govern.
Read this: Obama Now Partly Running On Bill Clintons Record Our Plan
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/obama-now-partly-running-on-bill-clintons-record-our-plan/
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Some of us, including the Obamas and the Clintons have moved on...
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)While the last Republican president still can't show his face in public.