Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

Midland — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:14:43 GMT

Well put in many ways. One way to distinguish Clinton's campaign from the others: she vigorously avoids using Republican talking points. Obama, Biden, and the others stumble into this often because they do not understand how the national political conservation works these days. They think their goodness or talent or whatever they have will simply shine right through the fuming barrage of Republican propaganda, the lazy disinterest most of the national media holds for real issues and the genial barely concealed contempt both factions feel for democrats, liberals, and other riff-raff not part of their social circle. Hillary knows she has to wade through the sewer to get the power she needs to clean out the system. Obama, like Kerry and other dems going all the way back to Mondale and Carter, thinks the waters will part before the glow of his virtue. It doesn't work that way.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

CaptCT — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:20:03 GMT

Karl Rove and Bush Co. were good at politics too, but they were horrible at government.

Wilentz said: "Democracy isn't some utopian proposition by which the people suddenly rule. We're too complicated a country for that. We have too many interests here. You need someone who can govern."

In other words, toughness in politics = competence in government. If that were true, the past 7 years would have been the greatest 7 years of U.S. history -- because nobody embraced "politics" better than Karl Rove and the Bush Administration.

This guy's comment -- Democracy isn't people rule -- supports the idea of the unitarian president, concentration of power among the rich and powerful, and the ultimate destruction of our government. If I were Obama or Edwards -- I'd run an ad with that boldfaced sentence (Democracy isn't ...) quoting Sean Wilentz, and identifying him as a Hillary supporter.

Obama's style is too professorial, when it needs to be more quick, cutting and direct. That's what Wilentz is reacting to more than anything else, IMHO.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

warhistoryx — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:56:01 GMT

If Hillary Clinton is the culmination of "a 40 year struggle for the Democrats to rediscover who they are," they have another 40 years in the wilderness ahead of them. Clinton has name recognition, she has big corporate donors, and she "understands how American politics works," at least in the sense that she has made multitudinous compromises with militarism, with moneyed interests, with the Republicans' alleged shift of the political center to the right, and with the ever-diminishing role of Congress and the American electorate, in exchange for power.

This isn't near good enough, Wilentz. If it is good enough for you, you're a sad little sap.The Democrats need to do a lot better than Hillary Clinton in order to restore the Democratic party as a viable choice for most Americans. Her nomination will immediately do damage in terms of the downticket races in states that are turning from red to blue. But the real harm will come when her militarized foreign policy will essentially continue that of Bush and Cheney, and contribute to the further erosion of American credibility abroad and of our domestic politics and civl liberties at home. I do not look to Clinton to restore Constitutional government, since she has never stood up to Bush on any of his unconstitutional measures since she entered the Senate.

Wilentz must have sold out any ideals he ever had of a more popular participatory political process, I agree with CaptCT, above, who wrote, "This guy's comment -- Democracy isn't people rule -- supports the idea of the unitarian president, concentration of power among the rich and powerful, and the ultimate destruction of our government."

Amen, and amen.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

masonmcd — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:40:59 GMT

I think Hillary, for Mr. Wilentz, is someone on whom he can project his ideal candidate.

Hillary has indeed supported position A, and a week later, the opposite position B. Yet for Wilentz, she accomplished it with weasel words that allow her to plausibly deny her initial position.

It happened with her Peru position, and the "drivers licenses for immigrants" position, to name two recent ones.

She uses "nuance" only to the extent that she can't be pinned down. If that's what Wilentz calls an effective political strategy, fine. But it's not the politics the rest of us are interested in.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

warhistoryx — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 01:16:55 GMT

Looks like Wilentz is hoping to be to the Hillary Clinton regime what Arthur Schlesinger was to the Kennedy Camelot--a resident historical cupbearer and crony. Will he chronicle the neo-Gilded Age while he hobnobs with the Robber Barons who underwrite the Clintons?

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

Nemoudeis — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:55:48 GMT

Funny that Obama reminds Wilentz of Adlai Stevenson ... because every time Hillary Clinton pops into view I keep seeing the wheezy ghost of Al Smith hovering behind her.

If anybody ever wondered what this country would be like if we had chosen Smith over Roosevelt in 1932, I think there's a very good chance that 2008 and beyond will give us all a pretty good idea of how that would have worked out.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

1950democrat — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 07:26:17 GMT

Very sensible, though I'd compare Hillary with Truman. I've been watching US politics since 1950. We Dems used to nominate pragmatists who fought for the blue collar workers and Southern farmers: FDR, Truman. JFK was a dreamer but practical enough to get some stuff done (unfortunately including getting us into Vietnam).

Since then all we've nominated were pointy-headed losers (or people who could be smeared as such, and didn't fight back). The only exceptions -- and the ONLY Dems to win re-election -- were the Clinton team.

Obama seems smack in that loser tradition. He's even doing the same kind of campaign McGovern did in 1972: packing Iowa precinct meetings with kids who don't reflect who the stay at home voters could support in November.

McGovern had a good reason for rushing into a contest he wasn't ready for: he really did think he could get us out of Vietnam sooner. Obama doesn't even have that; his timetable is about the same as Hillary's. If Obama really wanted to be president -- imo he would wait his turn, getting better known and getting more experience.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

1950democrat — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:32:56 GMT

Here's Robert F. Kennedy, Jr's take:

Hillary Haters and the Roosevelts

Posted December 12, 2007 | 11:40 PM (EST)

[....]

It's worth recalling the historical parallels with an earlier presidential couple. "No other word than hatred will do," observed a May 1936, Harper's Magazine feature "They Hate Roosevelt" by Marquis W. Childs. "The phenomenon to which I refer goes beyond objection to policies or programs. It is a consuming personal hatred of President Roosevelt and, to an almost equal degree, of Mrs. Roosevelt."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/hillary-haters-and-the-ro_b_76573.html?load=1&page=11#comments

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

fmarie — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:19:12 GMT

I disagree with Wilentz. I think Hillary would be the NEXT worst president we ever had. the dems arent in "a post reagan" period - thats ancient history - we are however in a post "career politicians" era. Young people know whats going on, they intend to make the statement of their lives in this election - and business as usual is OVER. And rightly so - they have the most to lose.

Hillary is a career politician, nafta, cafta, war, big business, insurance companies and defense contractors fund her campaign, and she is all about POWER, will play the corporate puppet and is conniving and ruthless, and certainly has a flair for fake country twang -( if in the south) and we are not fooled. not this time.

Any similarities between Obama and Clinton II as regards their plans for ending the War in Iraq pose no problem for me, because I know she is double-talking, with the defense contractors money jingling in her pockets, and he is the REAL DEAL.

She might have had a chance if it was 2004 - her time is over- she is last decade news.

re: Making the Case... for Hillary Clinton. By Sean Wilentz.

fleur — Tue, 13 May 2008 17:37:45 GMT

In your professorial opinion, please, would you tell us in what ways HRC and Obama and Edwards are and are not Marxists or Socialists?

This is not an offensive position. I'm just curious.