So the race issues were immediately buried at last night’s Democratic debate from Nevada. However, that doesn’t mean we’re heading into a boring few days until Nevada. Today Clinton opened up the next line of criticism.
Story from Bloomberg:
Jan. 16 (Bloomberg) — Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton today renewed an attack on chief rival Barack Obama by questioning his experience and leadership abilities.
A day after a debate in which both candidates sought to put aside an earlier spat over race and gender, Clinton, in an interview with Bloomberg Television, said she was “taken aback” by Obama’s comments that he doesn’t view the job of president as an “operating officer.”
“It’s important that we have a president who understands that you have to run the government,” Clinton, a senator from New York, said. Americans want a president “who is hands-on” and does more than set goals.
Her spokesman, Phil Singer, signaled that they planned to continue raising questions about Obama’s experience and style heading into the next round of caucuses and primaries by sending out an e-mail highlighting Clinton’s comments and posting a clip of her statement on the YouTube Web site.
So it’s back to attacking Obama on experience and I think that’s a good angle against him for Clinton. Arguably, most people agree she is perceived to have more experience. However, looking at Bill Richardson, clearly the candidate with the most experience on the Democratic side, do voters really hold experience to be high on their priority list? I think Obama’s personality and message has been plenty strong to overcome any attacks on experience from Clinton.
The Republicans will no doubt play the experience card on Obama if given the chance.
Now I’ve heard it all. Bill Clinton is painting Obama as the “establishment candidate”. Story from USAToday:
SPARKS, Nev. (AP) â€” Bill Clinton, who carried Nevada in two general elections, urged voters Tuesday to buck labor endorsements for Sen. Barack Obama and support his wife in Saturday’s hotly contested presidential caucuses as the only Democratic candidate with the experience necessary to change the country.
The former president trumpeted New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s accomplishments while painting Obama as the “establishment” candidate who would bring only the “feeling of change.”
“One candidate says you should vote for me because I’ve not been involved at all in the struggles of the past and therefore we need to turn over a new leaf and (try) something absolutely new. And if you want the feeling of change, then that is the person you should support,” Clinton said in a 75-minute speech to about 300 people in a YMCA gymnasium.
If that isn’t the establishment pot calling the kettle black. In my opinion, Obama hasn’t had enough time in Washington to even become a part of the establishment. Right now it seems that the debate between Obama and Clinton appears to be which of them can actually produce “change”. According to Bill Clinton, Obama would produce the “feeling of change”, but not actual change. Does anybody listen to this? Are people swayed by judging which candidate can truly produce “change” and which will bring “fake change”?
Honestly, can’t Democratic voters just examine the records of both candidates and make a judgment from that? Tossing the “change” lingo around tells me nothing about where the candidates actually stand on a single issue.