Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

merrily

(45,251 posts)
61. That is not how either Bubba or she framed it--except maybe when convenient.
Sun Mar 29, 2015, 11:27 PM
Mar 2015

FYI, the reality is that Hillary does happen to be the wife of a former President and she seems to have chosen to run for President herself. Certain things do and will inevitably flow from that, especially given the way they have both behaved around that issue and the importance of the office.

First, in 1992, he and she both sold his candidacy as getting two for the price of one. Her supporters tried to sell her 2008 candidacy the same way, with no demurrer whatsoever from her (or him) and her supporters have already been selling her seemingly likely 2016 candidacy the same way.

Meanwhile, she herself has referred to his administration with words like "we" and "us," including while she was running for President in 2008 and since then. For example, when questioned at a 2008 primary campaign event about how her husband had run on equal rights for gays, then treated them badly (I assume that referred to DADT and DOMA), she replied, "I thought we did pretty well."

Additionally, during her 2008 campaign, she cited her experiences as her husband's first lady as though they added to her own qualifications to be President.

I have not heard her disavow anything her husband did. To the contrary, she has praised her husband's administration. So, I am not at all sure how associating her with the things he did, good or bad, is unfair or sexist or any of things claimed about it.

Meanwhile, he was her campaign surrogate in 2008, though they played good cop, bad cop when something he said got attacked.

Bottom line, though, neither the Clintons nor their supporters should expect to have it both ways, or every which way on this issue.

(Obviously, if Hillary had been President first and Bubba had behaved about her administration and his experience as First Gentleman the same way as she has, the exact same realities would obtain.)

Please- do go on notadmblnd Mar 2015 #1
Mmmmmm. Don't tempt me. But I am not trying to hurt the Clintons MaxRobes Mar 2015 #12
Its allright to want a real primary but trashing one of the candidates is not a way Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #29
Well it is if that candidate is standing in the way of having a primary. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #43
Which candidate is standing in the way? Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #45
I believe the Clintons are discouraging the entry of major competitors and do not MaxRobes Mar 2015 #51
Yes, but not only the Clintons, the Party. Please see Reply 55 below. merrily Mar 2015 #56
I think you are wrong, in fact the primary would get any candidate practice in the General Election Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #57
Let me add this, if Hillary or any candidate cant handle the primary then we need a better candidate Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #59
I do not see the gun Hillary has aimed at any other primary candidate QuestionAlways Mar 2015 #65
This has been a conversation on going. I doubt I mentioned a gun. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #70
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #115
i sure wish i could cast a DON'T LIKE the originator post BECAUSE IT STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN trueblue2007 Mar 2015 #71
Well, there you go ... earthside Mar 2015 #78
Challenging? Challenging would be running against Hillary, I am ready for those who Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #79
But as of now, not one is running yet QuestionAlways Mar 2015 #93
And your point is what? MaxRobes Mar 2015 #94
score ! drray23 Mar 2015 #2
I'll debate ageism with you if your 70 years old or older. As to mysogeny MaxRobes Mar 2015 #9
The suggestion that a member of a group can not be prejudiced or otherwise antagonistic... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #98
Accomplishments LeFleur1 Apr 2015 #114
In the age of income inequality I do object. I object to anyone getting $300,000 MaxRobes Mar 2015 #13
I've seen Hillary supporters disparage Warren because of her age davidpdx Apr 2015 #113
Your concern is duly noted. n/t Lil Missy Mar 2015 #3
Robust candidacy of Jeb? Where did you hear that? napi21 Mar 2015 #4
CBS had a poll out this morning with Jeb on top. Pundits expect his 1st qtr funding raising MaxRobes Mar 2015 #16
Not that it's any of your business, but I'm 72! napi21 Mar 2015 #42
Only if you're running for President MaxRobes Mar 2015 #44
No, I'm not running for President! NOT because I'm 72, but because I'm not qualified. napi21 Mar 2015 #87
What if she were 80 or 90? Is an age qualification ever appropriate? MaxRobes Mar 2015 #88
Mentaal & physical abilities are far more important than age. Some people napi21 Mar 2015 #95
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #106
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #104
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #107
I am and I support Hillary QuestionAlways Mar 2015 #67
A poll of whom?/NT DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #100
Who do you want to win the nomination? hrmjustin Mar 2015 #5
Amy Klobuchar. She is my home state and home town Senator. She is very popular in MaxRobes Mar 2015 #18
She and Warren will not run. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #19
Oh, ugh, not Klobuchar! She speaks well but she has no courage. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2015 #35
Amy has one of the highest approval rating of any sitting Senator and MaxRobes Mar 2015 #54
I don't need to give her a second look. I've already given her The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2015 #58
So Velveteen, after Hillary loses in 2016 and Amy is our candidate in 2020 I'll escort you MaxRobes Mar 2015 #62
I always vote for the Democrat over the Republican. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2015 #66
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #116
Oh, this is a companion piece, is it? Wow. MANative Mar 2015 #6
By "companion piece" I was simply referring to another thread I started on the front MaxRobes Mar 2015 #22
Another Clinton hit piece. Ya'll are on a roll today. leftofcool Mar 2015 #7
I must have trashed the other one. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #8
Let me ask you a question, you talk about Hillary getting paid for her speeches, she's qualified Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #10
$300,000 for a speech is legalized bribery, imo. See reply above. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #23
Let's go with my question, did you worj and did you receive compensation? Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #26
Yes,I worked for pay in the economy for roughly 40 years and was paid fairly MaxRobes Mar 2015 #33
This is what she could command. Attorneys gets paid much more than what i was Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #37
We are all sorry you have no grasp on economics. Think of it this way, FSogol Mar 2015 #40
My grasp of economics allows me to perceive that Bill Clinton wasn't paid MaxRobes Mar 2015 #46
The speaking fees they are paid go to the charity that bears their name QuestionAlways Mar 2015 #69
True only in the exception. They keep the vast majority of the money MaxRobes Mar 2015 #77
You prove my point QuestionAlways Mar 2015 #80
No, but I can do a better job of explaining my point MaxRobes Mar 2015 #83
Anyone who questions Hillary is just parroting Bill Kristol? davidpdx Apr 2015 #112
Bill Clinton won TWICE. McGovern, Carter the second time, Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry LOST. RBInMaine Mar 2015 #11
So did George Bush 4now Mar 2015 #15
Yah Bill won. For his third Party. The Democrats didn't win anything. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #24
Did you forget that following Carter's loss vs Reagan that people were FSogol Mar 2015 #41
Bill's triangulating didn't get the Democrats back in power it got the Clintons in power MaxRobes Mar 2015 #47
+1 Additionally, it's ludicrous to believe that, in 1992 and 1996, most merrily Mar 2015 #63
Hello Merrily, thanks for your reply. I agree with you in part. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #84
I am not sure which part of my post you disagreed with, but thanks. merrily Mar 2015 #90
This message was self-deleted by its author appalachiablue Mar 2015 #92
Ross Perot. Incumbency. Plus, Hillary is not Bubba and Bubba is not running again. merrily Mar 2015 #60
You bring up some important things to consider. 4now Mar 2015 #14
There are many problems with your post OKNancy Mar 2015 #17
To clarify, what I argued is that Bill ran and governed as "barely a Democrat" and MaxRobes Mar 2015 #28
Hillary is her own woman. OKNancy Mar 2015 #32
Valid criticisms of the Clintons that encompass Hillary's role in their MaxRobes Mar 2015 #49
That is not how either Bubba or she framed it--except maybe when convenient. merrily Mar 2015 #61
Hello again, Merrily. Here I agree with you 100% MaxRobes Mar 2015 #85
She's Jamaal510 Apr 2015 #110
I'm no Hillary fan but LiberalElite Mar 2015 #20
When I was 65 I thought like you did. Turning seventy cured me of that. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #30
Your experience LiberalElite Mar 2015 #36
I know about 100 people in their seventies. None of them are fit to be president MaxRobes Mar 2015 #50
Your observation is specious. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #99
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #108
Yes and no. No one can predict how anyone is going to age. merrily Mar 2015 #68
Actuarial tables suggest Secretary Of Clinton will live to eighty five years old... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #102
The age at which the average woman is likely to die has nothing to do with what I posted. merrily Apr 2015 #111
Of course you realize you are about to get torn apart by a pack of yapping feral chihuahuas tularetom Mar 2015 #21
so when someone disagrees OKNancy Mar 2015 #25
It isn't a question of an argument being countered tularetom Mar 2015 #53
Yep, as per usual. merrily Mar 2015 #64
And there you have it. The real reason some dems don't like Hillary Buzz cook Apr 2015 #118
Well, they tried the same crap with Obama but none of it stuck tularetom Apr 2015 #119
I've already asked and answered that question. Buzz cook Apr 2015 #120
I should add Buzz cook Apr 2015 #122
Are you referring to the women members of DU? notadmblnd Mar 2015 #27
Hell no, I love the women members of DU tularetom Mar 2015 #48
Thanks. I appreciate that. I love a good debate. And have a thick skin. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #31
+++ swilton Mar 2015 #34
her health is not up to the task of a campaign quadrature Mar 2015 #38
How did you divine "her health is not up to the task of a campaign" ? DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #101
I can't predict the future so gwheezie Mar 2015 #39
ha ha ha quickesst Mar 2015 #52
We DESERVE primaries, but our party seems to have decided primaries suck. merrily Mar 2015 #55
Thank you for all of your swilton Mar 2015 #73
Wow, thanks. This must be one of my luckier days. merrily Mar 2015 #74
Yes, thank you. It's undeniable that strong forces within the Democratic establishment MaxRobes Mar 2015 #89
Thank you marym625 Mar 2015 #91
I AM WOMAN........ HEAR ME ROAR you sexist trueblue2007 Mar 2015 #72
I am woman swilton Mar 2015 #75
The Kennedys, Roosevelts, Adams, and Bushes benefited from nepotism as well... DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #103
Clearly my original post made you angry. I am sorry about that. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #76
My own "worry list" has noted BlueMTexpat Mar 2015 #81
Like all long time readers / non posters I am subject to "the curse of lurkers" MaxRobes Mar 2015 #86
That will depend on what BlueMTexpat Mar 2015 #96
Fair enough. MaxRobes Mar 2015 #97
I and others have been worried about a Hillary Clinton presidency since 2007. Liberal_Stalwart71 Mar 2015 #82
You are not the only one who has those concerns... KoKo Apr 2015 #105
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2015 #109
With all due respect Proud Liberal Dem Apr 2015 #117
This concern troll has been banned. n/t Lil Missy Apr 2015 #121
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Myrina Apr 2015 #123
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»My worry list for the Cli...»Reply #61