“Man from Hope, Meet Audacity of Hope”
Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus compares Sen. Obama to Bill Clinton in her latest column, “The Clintonian Candidate.” Some highlights:
Like Clinton before him, Obama presents himself as a new kind of politician who can rise above and bridge partisan differences. Go back to Clinton’s 1991 announcement speech, and it’s easy to imagine Obama speaking.“Today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way,” lamented one politician. The other called for “a new kind of leadership … not mired in the politics of the past, not limited by old ideologies.” Can you tell the difference? The first is Obama, the second Clinton, but either could have been channeling the other.
…In fact, Obama fits himself explicitly into the Clinton mold. “In his platform — if not always in his day-to-day politics — Clinton’s Third Way went beyond splitting the difference,” he writes. “It tapped into the pragmatic, nonideological attitude of the majority of Americans.”
…Obama is like Bill Clinton in his natural ease with people and his ability to win them over.
It’s not an unflattering analogy, despite some of the negative aspects a comparison to President Clinton can entail (Vermonters for Obama expects that the darker parallels are yet to come). Now if we can just extend Marcus’s list of similarities to include a 61 percent favorability rating…
February 1st, 2007 at 2:59 am EST
I believe this is a dangerous comparison because an additional extension of this is the understanding that Hillary Clinton is more “Clintonian” — in a certain obvious respect.Obama should stand on his own with no comparisons to the Clintons.
February 1st, 2007 at 7:19 pm EST
But Bill Clinton had what Hilary can never fabricate; the combination of charm and intelligence that inspires people to cast aside their dour skeptic’s frown. That analogy seems entirely appropriate. I can’t remember the last time thinking about a politician made me happy… until now.