I can’t help but speculate about Biden’s comments today on HRC’s incrementalist style. Asked about Clinton’s pragmatic approach to things, VPOTUS praised Sanders’s boldness:
“I like the idea of saying, ‘We can do much more,’ because we can. … I don’t think any Democrat’s ever won saying, ‘We can’t think that big—we ought to really downsize here because it’s not realistic. C’mon man, this is the Democratic Party! I’m not part of the party that says, ‘Well, we can’t do it.”
Now this is interesting in itself, especially with recent reports that Obama had been dropping hints that it’s time to start circling the wagons for HRC. It’s also an interesting rebuttal of the DLC’s message to the liberal wings of the party in the 90s when Biden had recently been Presidential material.
But the part that really struck me was:
“Presidents have always been told by really smart people: ‘Don’t push something that you can’t succeed in — it diminishes your power,’ I completely disagree with that proposition.”
Why the shift from campaigning style to how Presidents are counseled? Here’s a thought:
A little over two weeks ago, Bill Clinton tussled angrily and publicly with some Black Lives Matter protestors over the damaging effects his landmark crime bill had on black communities. To be fair WJ
C really regretted the incident, enough to “almost want to apologize.” During the exchange, WJC said he was told he would only gain needed Republican support mith much stronger measures(*), and he specifically names Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer as the ones who counseled him. During the Brooklyn debate, HRC invoked Biden as well during her defense of her role/non-role in the legislation.
Is Biden getting out from under the Clintons’ attempts to rope him into the crime bill problem they can’t seem to put to bed? Or is this just the usual lack of discipline? Could it be a planned/intentional attempt to have some impact on the party?
_________________________________
(*) I find it hard to understand what WJC wants us to think about his role in that bill. Is he proud of it or not? Is it a triumph of his Presidency or the outcome of capitulating to Republican leadership? What did he actually do that makes it his accomplishment?
In at The End of The World 
I am working up a post about my own reconsideration of Bill Clinton’s incrementalism. I know, I know, people are waiting patiently for it, so I really should hurry. I’m inclined to be forgiving since WJC was following in Reagan’s wake, back when you couldn’t even say the word “liberal” on television. In fact, I guess you still can’t say that word. Has there ever been a more effective bit of communications strategy than Michael Deaver’s elimination of that word from the political vocabulary?
All that said, in regards HRC, it ain’t 1994 no more. Love Biden’s quotes.
LikeLike