Bill Clinton: Vote for candidate of ‘hope’ not ‘fear’
Posted by Brad at 8:09am Sunday, March 2, 2008
Given all the rhetoric of fear we’ve heard from the Hillary Clinton camp lately, including the now infamous “3 a.m.” campaign ad (see the second video below), it was interesting to hear Bill Clinton say these words…
Now, one of Clinton’s laws of politics is this. If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other one is try get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears and the other one is appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope.
.
Granted, he said those words four years ago when campaigning for then-nominee John Kerry, but those words are as true today as they were then. And I agree that voters should vote for a candidate of inspires “hope” over a candidate who instills “fear” in the hearts and minds of Americans. If voters reject “fear” in support of “hope,” that won’t bode well for Mr. Clinton’s campaigning wife, whose campaign put out this ridiculous ad this week…
.
Obama’s campaign, which has responded to attacks by Hillary and John McCain with lightning fast profeciency, put out this quite effective response ad in mere hours after Hillary’s fear-mongering ad…
.
Less than 48 hours after the last debate, Hillary Clinton angrily denounced Barack Obama and his campaign for what she described as dirty tricks right out of the Karl Rove playbook. Yet, she turns around and pulls the dirtiest of tricks out of the Rove playbook by employing outright fear-mongering in her advertising, reminiscent of the dreadful Bush-Cheney “Wolves” campaign ad in 2004.
Just like the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2004 and just like John McCain’s campaign now, Hillary Clinton is trying to scare voters into voting for her. Well, just like Bill Clinton said in 2004, voters should vote for the candidate of “hope” and not for the candidate of “fear.”
I don’t know why I thought the Clintons were better than that. They aren’t. They’ll say and do whatever they need to in order to be achieve their desired objective — especially when it’s power. And that means saying one thing when it’s politically advantageous and doing something completely opposite when necessary. “Do as I say, not as I do,” is the Clinton motto.
More and more, because the Clinton political machine is so nefarious (with tactics like this), that if by some travesty Obama doesn’t get the nomination, I may be forced to vote for McCain to keep the Clintons out of the White House. Surely, McCain can’t be any worse than George W. Bush; I can’t say the same about another Clinton White House.
Vote for the candidate of “hope.” Reject the candidates of “fear.” Haven’t we lived in fear long enough?
.
On Mar 3, 2008, Brian said:
What continues to astound me is that there has not been a backlash from the Dem base in response to her recent campaining tactics. Whether permenant damage will be done or not remains to be seen but there is little doubt in my mind she is doing damage to party unity which ultimately could lost them the election in November. I was torn from the beginning but have put my full support behind Obama at this point (because of the positive hope message he is leading a movement regarding). Because of Clinton’s recent tactics, I really don’t think I would consider her in November either. At this point, my November vote will likley be Obama if he is in the race or McCain if he is not.
It just seems that she stopped running on her own merits some weeks ago and has decided to pick apart every conceivable flaw in her opponent. This is ironic to me considering her most recent line is that this is a job interview for President. As a hiring manager, if a prosepective candidate came in and pointed out everything negative about the previous applicant while spending little time explaining why I should give them the job, obviously they wouldn’t get the job.
For shame Clintons for working so hard to turn a relatively positive election season into something other. You might consider that you were a decent candidate for the position but you just happen to be running against a better one. Unless something completely unexpected happens tomorrow, it is time to bow out ‘gracefully’ - we don’t need this same negative ‘anti-hope’ rhetoric through April!