In the L.A. Times, Jonathan Chait — previously the author of “The Case for Bush Hatred” — joins the growing band of left-liberals souring on the Clintons:
Something strange happened the other day. All these different people — friends, co-workers, relatives, people on a liberal e-mail list I read — kept saying the same thing: They’ve suddenly developed a disdain for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Maybe this is just a coincidence, but I think we’ve reached an irrevocable turning point in liberal opinion of the Clintons.
The sentiment seems to be concentrated among Barack Obama supporters. Going into the campaign, most of us liked Hillary Clinton just fine, but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her suggested that she might not be a good Democratic nominee. But now that loathing seems a lot less irrational. We’re not frothing Clinton haters like … well, name pretty much any conservative. We just really wish they’d go away…
As previously hypothesized, Clinton Disillusionment Syndrome might not prevent Sen. Hillary Clinton from being elected, but it may be permanently eroding  to some degree  the Clintonian style of politics. Chait, being Chait, works a lot of Republican-bashing and Clinton apologia into his piece, but ultimately reaches the same question raised here these past weeks:
If Hillary wins the nomination, most of us will probably vote for her because the alternative is likely to be worse. But what happens if she’s embroiled in another scandal? Will liberals rally behind her, or will they remember the Democratic primary?
Perhaps the Clinton campaign will issue a statement noting the Chait article as an example of the Clintons’ ability to unify Americans across ideological lines.
Update: Even the NYT’s Bob Herbert is showing symptoms of CDS: “The Clinton camp knows what it’s doing, and its slimy maneuvers have been working… it’s legitimate to ask, given the destructive developments of the last few weeks, whether the Clintons are capable of being anything but divisive.” Vaster, vaster!
(h/t Memeorandum.)
Yeah. And Collins was on it, too!
“If Hillary wins the nomination, most of us will probably vote for her because the alternative is likely to be worse. But what happens if she’s embroiled in another scandal? Will liberals rally behind her, or will they remember the Democratic primary?”
What’s your alternative? (IOW, ‘Who’s yer Daddy?’)
cleo not figuring out that type of thinking just further poisons fellow travelers against the Clintons before Hillary is nominated.
What makes you think I support Hillary? oh, the mindset. I see.
BTW;
Who’s yer daddy?
Not only do I think this is true but I am one of those liberals. I’m a liberal Democrat who is usually more liberal than his party and I am seriously thinking of picking a third party candidate just so that I don’t have to vote for Clinton. Although I was never all the way in the Bill Clinton camp anyway so I suppose it doesn’t mean that much.
What makes you think I support Hillary?
Actually, I’m pretty sure you support Stalin, but he’s not on the ballot.
cleo, not the mindset so much as your track record of obtuseness here, at JOM, and elsewhere.
“cleo, not the mindset so much as your track record of obtuseness here, at JOM, and elsewhere.”
weak dodge. Who do you like for 2008?
cleo,
I don’t particularly like anyone for 2008. And to paraphrase Jon Stewart, I’m not your monkey.
Oooh. Digby be talkin’ smack.
Karl;
Despite what you think of me, I respect your opinion. But I do think you should spend a little less time slamming your ideological opposites while leaving those who have abandoned your conservative principles with such psychic largesse that you support them, without supporting them.
kkkleo – if you are unaware of our positions on the candidates, then one might suggest that you go read about the last 75 posts about the primaries.
huh, so this post is “slamming the opposition” while this post is… ???
But I do think you should spend a little less time slamming your ideological opposites
Ditto, cleo. Or isn’t that what you are doing here (and at JOM, and Patterico, etc)
Yeah, the total lack of self-awareness is part of the reason for my opinion of cleo’s “contibutions.”
“Yeah, the total lack of self-awareness is part of the reason for my opinion of cleo’s “contibutions.—
“Ditto, cleo. Or isn’t that what you are doing here (and at JOM, and Patterico, etc)”
Karl,Maybee
I am, at least, equally dissatisfied with the choice of public servants available on my side of the aisle. “Awareness” is a two-way street, so if you have no recollection of my expressions of disappointment,……… there is this thing called ‘Google’…………..
Karl – I think it is a blissful lack of self awareness. If ignorance is bliss, total and complete ignorance to Miss Cleo’s degree must be nirvana.
beCauSe oF TeH cOrpOrAtIsTs !!!
CDS: I like that. But, then, I’m a Republican that wrote against the Clinton’s before Internet with 9600 baud modems. And, now, I’m a female 53 year old Bush hater. Not being senile I’m open to new people and new ideas. Last year I noticed Obama. Read his book. I’ve been talking about him since.
I don’t think I’m the only Republican or Independent that would love to vote for him.
And, yet, never ever would I cast a vote for Hillary.
This could be not only a turning point for the Democrat Party, but for the country. We need to work together and end the hate. Obama can do that, Hillary is a hater.
jan – being anti-clinton does not men you became a Republican. This self identification BS Moby-ism never fails to produce a good guffaw.
JD, I appreciate your point (the “We need to work together and end the hate” seemed to reveal more than it was probably intended).
However, as being anti-Clinton does not make one a Republican, being a “Bush hater” does not unmake one a Republican either. And while there are lots of In Name Only members of various organizations; there are also lots of Who Made You the Membership Director? types as well.
“We need to work together and end the hate. Obama can do that, Hillary is a hater.”
1. What on earth gives you the idea, aside from his vapid, vague, puff-pastry speeches, that Obama is a “uniter?” Better do some research on Obama’s current “spiritual advisor”–you may be in for a nasty surprise.
2. What gives you the idea that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Steny Hoyer, and Jack Murtha are going to bat their eyelashes at and roll over for a half-term, pretty-faced, platitude-dropping, Senate backbencher who a) hasn’t paid his political dues, b) has a list of “present” votes a mile long, and b) has already proposed invading Pakistan?
New ideas? Obama? Are you kidding? He may have a pretty face, but in his mind every day is still Groundhog Day 1936 and he’s “Barack Delano Obamavelt.”
“We need to work together”
No.
We don’t.
AS someone who leans left (but not hard left), I completely concur with this. I think that Bill was a competent adminstrator and wasn’t nearly as liberal as everyone made him out to be, for good or for ill.
But, he’s a slimy character and always was. I think the smearing of Obama has taken it over the top for me, though. Now, whoever gets the Dem nomination is hurt by this, and they don’t seem to care.
I also kind of get that “I just wanna be president” vibe more from Hillary than anyone except maybe Romney. I know they all have that, but those two just seem to have it the worst.
HATER!
I’m seeing a lot of, “Obama is a uniter!” type comments. “He’s shiny and new!” ain’t gonna cut it for me. then again, RTO seems to think he might get schooled quickly and turn out okay. meh, think I’ll go kill some more brain cells with TV.
CDS is a lot really a backdoor way of shining Obama’s halo of changeyness. To the extent that the argument succeeds, the remaining Clinton supports are not in the changeyness game, they’re in the status quo ante game. When Clinton gets the nomination, the Obama kids are going to understand in a feeling it kind of way the proposition that the Democratic party has rejected changeyness. So the two questions I think are what motivates changeyness acolytes to go pull the lever for Hillary and why is McCain smiling?
So the two questions I think are what motivates changeyness acolytes to go pull the lever for Hillary and why is McCain smiling?
1) “the alternative will be worse” (see Chait’s comment above).
2) Because in spite of the fact he continues to give to his party the finger, that SOB arose from the electoral dead: how d’ya like that, sucker!
happyfeet:
This is quite brilliant; I have every intention of stealing it!
Thanks, K. Brilliant and massively hungover. There’s hopeyness to be found in that.
jdm – point taken. I still call Moby on that one.
This whole uniter meme is laughable. It usually involves R’s acting like D’s, and getting bitten in the ass on their way ou the door.
“We need to work togetherâ€Â
No.
We don’t.
Good ‘scorched earth’ strategy.
Can somebody tell me what the hell a “uniter” (eg Obama) or a divider (eg Bush) is? I see those terms bantied about and I really don’t think the people using them know how they are using them? Is it as simple as “I agree with him/her…he/she’s a uniter”? What a couple of meaningless and shallow terms.
OI – Meaningless drivel.
Cleo – Tell your own folks about scorched earth. Just look what happened to Barry when he had the audacity to say something nice about Reagan.
Good ’scorched earth’ strategy
No, Cleo. It is a good answer to people who pretend to want cooperation when their real agenda is to subjugate you. “We must work together” is the contemporary radical Left’s equivalent of “arbeit macht frei”
“We must work together†is the contemporary radical Left’s equivalent of “arbeit macht freiâ€Â
Oh, I don’t think it’s so much the radical Left… just the regular Democrat plea for bi-partisanship hums the same melody.
Why is it that “bipartisanship” never manifests itself as D’s acting like R’s? Or why is it that when R’s are in charge, they should reach across the aisle, but never the same calls when the D’s are in charge?
I’m a Republican …Bush hater.
Not senile …open to new people and new ideas.
Last year I noticed Obama. Read his book.
I’ve been talking about him since.
Serious enquiries only.
P.S. Hillary is a hater.
Darleen,
I think of it as coming from the lips of a Loyalist (soon to be Canadian) in 1776. I share no goals held by progs – not even when they are wearing the prettiest shade of lipstick ever seen on their snouts. They’re slavers and I’ve always been a Wilberforce type of fellow.
Because whenever a D agrees with an R position on a big issue, the D is quickly driven out of the party (Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman, etc.)
This is what I mean about cleo not having self-awareness; the “scorched earth” approach is at least as apt a description of the D SOP. There is a group of conservatives that cannot abide McCain, but he has not been forced out of the Republican party as yet. Jeffords was bribed to leave when the Senate was split down the middle, but his positions actually fit the liberal profile. The GOP was not demanding he leave. In contrast, Lieberman is still largely liberal but one big issue was enough to stir a revolt against him by Lefty activists.
I’m a liberal Democrat…
usually more liberal than his party…
seriously thinking of picking a third party candidate…
Phone home, Che !!!
P.S. Just so that I don’t have to vote for Clinton.
“He may have a pretty face, but in his mind every day is still Groundhog Day 1936 and he’s “Barack Delano Obamavelt.â€Â
He should hire phoebe as a consultant, she could catch him up to ’57, anyways.
‘scorched earth’ strategy
Fire plays an important role in nutrient cycling, diversity maintenance, community composition, and habitat structure. Suppression of fire has led to unforeseen changes in ecosystems that often adversely affect plants, animals, and humans.
~wiki @ fire_ecology~
Are you saying you want to see penguins drowning, ‘cleo?
diversity maintenance
TRUMP !!!
…nutrient cycling !
…diversity maintenance !!
…community composition !!!
HABITAT TRICK !!!
I’m still laughing my tuckus off over Smantypants being somehow under the impression that Republicans look upon the president — or any politician — as a father figure.
“Who’s yer daddy” indeed. That’s metrosexual thinking, Miss Cleo.
[…] expressing disillusionment with the Clintons’ campaign tactics and character (discussed here earlier today) asks whether this disillusionment will have any lasting impact, and concludes that it will not: […]
[…] let us tip our caps to regular commenter happyfeet, for the following observation on the current bout of Clinton Disillusionment Syndrome among […]