What Hillary Clinton and George Bush Have in Common

George Bush and Hillary Clinton both share a politics where they are disliked by large numbers of Americans and rather than try to get their numbers up, they are reduced to trying to get their opponent's numbers down.

Hillary Clinton entered this campaign with about 45-46% of Americans who would never support her. After one negative tactic after another her positive support has gone down and the number of people who will never support her has gone up.

This is why Barack Obama runs significantly ahead of Hillary Clinton in match-ups against John McCain and among political independents who usually decide elections. Obama reaches outward, upward and sideways while Hillary reaches backward, downward and yesterday with negative commentary about her opponent overwhelming anything positive she conveys about herself.

Hillary Clinton embodies the politics of the Bush years; Barack Obama embodies the
politics of the post-Bush years.

Comments

[Tankan]

Bush-Clinton common denominator is warmongers!

Republicons secretly prefer Hillary Clinton to John McCain!

[JGatsby]

I support Obama but I agree with other posters here that equating Ms. Clinton with Bush is insane and trivializes the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration and the damage they have done to the world and the country. The hatred against Bush is justified. Senseless war, destruction of civil rights, incompetence that led to 9/11 and Katrina, the list goes on and on. While I agree Ms. Clinton has done some dumb things the hatred towards her is based on sexism and mis-reporting. Having said that I still think our best chance to win back the White House is with Obama.

[englishprof]

Poor, poor Billary! The demographics are shifting! The sky is falling in! The Hispanics are starting to get to know Mr. Obama, and they like him as much as do many other groups.

Perhaps Billary had better concoct some lies about plagiary. Perhaps s/he has better denigrate the obvious leadership that enable Mr. Obama to move people. Perhaps s/he had better get Ickes, Penn, or some other Rove type to revise the DeLayesque gerrymandering in Texas.

Better denigrate Mr. Obama's command of the spoken word. Better denigrate the states where he has won. Better see that a number of votes in Harlem vanish. Better deluge the superdelegates with phone calls from Bill, Albright, Chelsea, and anyone else s/he can enlist. Oh yes, and, if all else fails, lets exhume the ghosts of delegates from Florida and Michigan. Never mind that it was agreed that these states' primaries would not count because they were held too early.

Yes, Billary is a fine display of what is best about America -- we are, after all, number one -- and will carry on in the same heroic vein as Mr. Bush. Enable a cheap and easy invasion in Iraq, and then criticize its execution when it fails. Billary has made it abundantly clear that s/he is ready, from Day One, to exemplify the kind of leadership Mr. Bush has delivered. Hide his/her taxes until after the nomination process. Appoint incompetents to run his/her campaign. Speak to the world -- American citizens and those abroad -- with the same tone-deaf insincerity and condescension as we have all experienced with Mr. Bush. Why do so many people feel pain when Mr. Bush speaks? A major reason is the tension we feel when we know someone is trying to put something over on us.

Counting out these shortcomings, Billary is obviously ready to signal to the world that s/he is ready to conduct America's business and that s/he would be a great occupant of the White House. I think we can all agree to that.

[grendl]

So it's Barack or bust. Okay.

Because you and the Hillary haters have so successfully characterized her as synonymous with the enemy, how can any Democrat in their right might venture into the cold November air and vote for her.

And because the Barack cynics have painted him as such a naive, empty, rhetoric spewing, speech stealing snake oil salesman, how can Hillary supporters in good conscience vote for him should she fail to win the nomination.

And if both sides are so staunch in their beliefs, convinced that the other candidate is in fact the antichrist how in the world are the democrats going to win a national election against the true evil which faces this country.

Stop tearing these people to shreds, and think for a change. And stop giving the GOP ammunition for the upcoming onslaught of character assassination attempts.

[altohone]

I agree with your sentiment, but pointing out a fact is not exactly a characterization... and Brent doesn't qualify as a "hater" for doing it.

If you play referee, you may want to choose words that don't appear biased.

[HowardRoarke]

Ironic isn't it? The Republicans have NO good candidates this year, the Democrats might lose anyways because they have TWO good candidates.

I agree the supporters are throwing slings and arrows at each other here on these boards. That is sad and wrong.

What would be worse is if one of the CANDIDATES started launching Republican style attacks at the other. I'm not worried about one of us being quoted in a General Election Republican ad. But one of our frontrunners being quoted by the Republicans to damage the eventual winner? That's a certainty at this point. That's just pathetic beyond words.

[aceholiday]

What's with "Hillary haters?" Sounds like "freedom fries." If that's all you've got please get an education. People like this really say much about how similar the clintons are to the bushes. how simple minded can you be?

[ifreez]

I will say one thing is similar. Rather then focusing on your audience, you strategy is to demonize your opponent..

[CitizenE]

I know George Bush. He's been my president for the past 7 years, and as an Obama supporter, I can tell you, Brent Budowsky, that Hillary Clinton is no George Bush, and anyone who thinks so trivializes the damage he's done. The nation's hatred of the Clintons has been a reaction to their personae, both being transparently political, often in the least flattering sense of the word. It has been exacerbated by a right wing hate machine, and in Mrs. Clinton's case by a misogyny so deeply ingrained in our culture that people who ought to know better are in complete denial about it. George Bush, on the other hand, was elected because of, among other things, his personality. People gave him every benefit of the doubt after 9/11. The animus towards him has purely to do with what he has done to our nation, the world, and its future, damage that well may be irreversible and epic in its proportions.
That said, it's clear that a large part of our populace has an ax to grind with Clinton, and it could be argued that on the left the ax has to do with positions she has taken, deeds done, rather than simple ad hominem bs. We live in a democracy, and if there is a candidate we can put forth as attractive and visionary as Obama is, and who is not all so different in his policy agenda, then despite Hillary Clinton's many virtues, rather than her foibles, which in some ways come with the territory, and about which I am extremely bored to hear about from fellow Obamadistas, I do think we should consider that we live in this nation with the haters, and it might be a good idea, to all other things being equal take that into consideration--sometimes the medicine goes down better with a spoonful of sugar.

[altohone]

The comparison on the specific issues raised is actually apt.

In no way is Bush's damage trivialized by the comparison, and the reality of the polls and the tactics being used are certainly fair game for discussion.

And, you really don't need to worry about McCain using comparisons of Hillary to Bush in the general election.

I too oppose character assination, but this isn't an example.

[nottoworry]

As much as I would like to see a qualified woman become president, I have said from the start of this campaign, "if we elect Hillary Clinton, we will have more of the same Bush doctrine we have already suffered".

I would also like to see a qualified black person become president. My preference is Barack Obama and if he is the person he projects, he will be the candidate. But if Hillary manages to fool enough people and becomes the Democratic candidate, I will vote for her.

[donw]

Both don't want to play by the rules.
Bush with his disregard for the rules of the constitution and Hillary with her disregard for the rules of the DNC.
I'll give her this though, she's smarter than Bush but in my opinion that just makes her all that more dangerous.

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

1. Running on famous last name

2. Inability to admit mistakes

3. Hard to listen to while giving speeches

4. Mobilizes other party's base

5. Trying to win Florida election unfairly

[ACunningham]

6. Running for an Un-Constitutional THIRD Term Family Presidency

[StephenDedalus82]

Where in the constitution does it say family members of former presidents can't run?

[jhamm1]

More importantly, Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush share nearly identical takes on foreign policy, with the exception of how to resolve the Iraqi crisis. If Bush doesn't find an excuse to mount a "pre-emptive" strike against Iran before his administration is out, you can bet Hillary will.

[newgal]

Another thing Hillary and Shrub have in common is that they surround themselves with sycophants - "only kool aid drinker need apply" appears to be their motto.

It was after I read Carl Bernstein's "A Woman in Charge" that I decided that I couldn't support Hillary because she exercises poor judgement and isn't able to overcome her blind spots because she's not open to other opinions and surrounds herself with "yes" people.

Reading about Patti Solis-Doyle and how she's running her campaign only reinforces the notion that she has poor judgement in people she listens to and who she places in power. She's no better than George Bush.

[MPeter]

They are both war-mongering liars. They are not to be trusted, people who have benefited immensely from corruption and nepotism. GW would not be President, were it not for his name. Hillary would not be a Senator or even a contender for the Presidency if she had not married sleek willy. Now they want to turn America into a dynasty.

[Countess]

I believe this has been the most negative campaign for the democratic nomination I have seen and I started with JFK but I am not at all surprised because I have a very low opinion of the Clintons and they have more than confirmed my view.

[DoninJoisey]

And both Bush and Clinton never, never, admit to any wrong - like Iraq.

[lynnn]

She doesn't have to she's a woman, it is sexist for us to second guess her.

[MPeter]

The Clintons are a destructive virus to this country just like the Bushes have been. Hillary and Bill do not care who they hurt...the Party or the country, lies and distortions as long as they get power. They are crooked and corrupt and have now become desperate because their so-called firewall is disappearing fast. See What AP is reporting in Texas, HRC's Alamo: Hillary 50% Obama 48%. It is not much of a firewall.

[HowardRoarke]

Brent, I look forward to your posts. You nailed this one.