So we’re getting HRC and WJC again. Some brain donor on HRC’s campaign decided she should put Big Bill in charge of economic revitalization “because, you know, he knows how to do it,” she said. “Especially in places like coal country and inner-cities and other parts of our country that have really been left out.”
Is this pure ego on Bill’s part? They’re putting crime, welfare, NAFTA, blowjobs, perjury, superpredators, the recovery that may or may not have been a recovery, and all the stuff HRC supporters told us “that’s her husband, don’t be sexist” right back in play. As Obama’s numbers go up, commentators start to place him among the greats, we’re putting this one front and center to re-fight the 90s.
Time to donate money to Trump. I don’t want to be on the wrong side of this fight.
In at The End of The World 
I wondered which one of us would get to this comment from Hilary first. It’s really astonishing. I saw the video of it, and she’s not saying it as an entirely serious proposal. I think she’s trying to have fun with the idea, but she’s not good at that kind of thing and so it gets reported as a serious idea.
I realize that the campaign wants to remind voters that the economy was healthy during her husband’s administration. But, surely a better way to do that is to say we had prosperity and a balanced budget when my husband was president. Then the Republicans lead us to a depression, and a Democrat brought the economy back. Put her candidacy in a larger context, rather than looking back twenty or more years.
Of course, Trump can say, well, I wasn’t even a registered Republican during W’s presidency so don’t blame that disaster on me. I would have totally avoided the financial meltdown in 2008, trust me.
LikeLike
Meanwhile, I’m sure that you’ve seen Obama’s speech at Rutgers. A masterful take down of Trump. I realize that Hillary will never be the natural that Obama is, but can’t someone write her a speech or two like that? Even a little bit?
LikeLike
Poor delivery, but more like rubbing salt in the wounds. Anyone with a long enough memory for WJC to mean anything job-wise, sees the Clinton recovery as a narrow one and remember little love from him.
I *do* wonder about her staffers – is she just too insulated to pick the right people? CP time, the coal industry piece, Steinem and Albright, Sanders’s bird friend . . . But you’re right – she has charming and warm moments, but none of her staffers seem to know how to turn it into a voice.
LikeLike
Yeah, this just seems way, way off — if it’s playful, it’s not playing, and nobody wants to see Bill or re-live what are now battles about the 90’s. Maybe they really don’t have the right people.
LikeLike
This morning I think it’s all about trying to cut the Sanders lead in Kentucky.
LikeLike
Makes sense. Losing two more states and not really appearing to care because she knows other states will carry her could become its own out of touch story. Still kind of a mess.
LikeLike
To be fair, In 2008, HRC was beating Obama all over the map even though he had the election all wrapped up. She beat him in PA, NY, MA, FL, IL, IA, OH, and CA. He was an exciting and historic candidate. She’s an unexciting, but still historic candidate.
LikeLike
Weird, thought I posted a comment, now I don’t see it. Apologies for any repetition, just want to register that I’m not dissing or defending HRC, definitely see her as an historic candidate, just mulling over weird uses of WJC in the campaign…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gail Collins counsels getting him out of there. I have to believe it’s insulated staff and a little bit stuck in the 90s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/opinion/subtract-one-clinton.html?_r=0
LikeLike