Bill Bradley trashes the Clinton's
On the record, Obama backer (and surrogate?) former Senator and presidential candidate Bill Bradley says some nasty, nasty things about the Clinton's in the British press.
Across the line in my book, but does the Clinton campaign really want to complain about this?
Do they really want to face several days of examination over whether the Clinton's have ever lied? (You know?)
Is this an Obama trap or is Bradly just speaking out of school?
Former senator Bill Bradley, who is a leading supporter of Obama and ran for president in 2000, accused the Clintons of “lying” in pursuit of victory.
Across the line in my book, but does the Clinton campaign really want to complain about this?
Do they really want to face several days of examination over whether the Clinton's have ever lied? (You know?)
Is this an Obama trap or is Bradly just speaking out of school?
posted by mikevotes at
8:01 AM
8 Comments:
The Obama campaign has already raised the Clinton's penchant for intense secrecy.... of being dodgy when it comes to full disclosure. I think this ties in with honesty issues and, when compared to the current White House would be a effective narrative for the Obama campaign to pursue.
To call into question the honesty or forthrightness of Hillary's claims could go a long way to cutting the legs out of the exaggerated "lifetime experience" meme. This is what happened to Obama with the bogus NAFTA kerfuffle.
By
-epm, at 10:00 AM
The more I think about this, the more I think that's what's going on here.
(I'm curious about it being in the British press. Is that to start the US story on the reaction rather than the comments, or is all this Bradley just being an ass?)
By
mikevotes, at 10:58 AM
So far we've seen CTV, The Scotsman, and The Times -- all foreign media outlets -- reporting "stories" that have affected our domestic politics. Don't know what to make of it, but it's interesting, isn't it?
By
-epm, at 1:24 PM
My guess is that there are two things there. 1) People are less cautious talking to the foreign press, and 2) it offers an avenue to introduce things quietly to the system in a venue where the checking and balance isn't as stringent.
By
mikevotes, at 3:14 PM
I tend to think it's just Bradley speaking out of school. And on the one hand it's damaging to the Clintons, given Bradley's positive reputation among Democrats. On the other hand, the nastiness of it tends to bear out Hillary's contention that the Obama "movement" is just politics as usual.
I actually think this was part of Hillary's strategy in going negative--force Obama to do the same, rip off his halo. And again, as with Samantha Power, Obama can control himself, but he can't control everyone who supports him.
By
Anonymous, at 3:22 PM
Yeah, I don't know. I really couldn't tell. I don't know how close Bradley is to the campaign.
And the strategy is definitely to drag Obama down into the mud. She has no other choice for two reasons.
1) The only shot she has at the superdelegates is to convince them that he's "damaged," and getting him into a nasty back and forth involving daily negative stories will enable that claim.
2) She's had no luck in trying to uplift (that's his ground more or less.)
(And, good point about the supporters, and, as I think you've pointed out before, not only the around the campaign supporters. There's real potential for ugly mistatements from people away from the campaign, celebrities, etc.)
By
mikevotes, at 3:42 PM
"checking and balance"...wow, what are those????
By
Anonymous, at 5:08 PM
It's been awhile.
By
mikevotes, at 5:30 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home