Leading Articles

null 27° London Hi 28°C / Lo 16°C

Leading article: Diminished and discredited

Tuesday, 1 July 2008

In theory, Barack Obama should have been Bill Clinton's ideal candidate for US President. Young, bright, ambitious and bold, with an unerring popular touch, Mr Obama has so much in common with the former President. And, even 16 years apart, in such very different Americas, their messages of can-do optimism, social inclusion and change allow voters to think better of themselves. Whatever one thinks about Toni Morrison's remark about Mr Clinton being the first black US President, he can nonetheless be seen as a trailblazer for Mr Obama in this way, too.

If only, it is tempting to say, Mr Obama had not emerged as the main obstacle to Mr Clinton's wife winning the Democratic nomination, a great deal could have been different. The most exciting presidential candidate at least since Bill Clinton, and possibly since JFK, could have had perhaps the most accomplished US political campaigner on his side from the start.

Instead, something almost inconceivable happened. The former President, who had emerged from the White House personally tarnished, but still respected for his political and leadership gifts, managed to damage the formidable reputation he had left. Even as Hillary Clinton's stature grew, Bill lost what remained of his, stooping to petulance, sniping and – shamefully – even racist innuendo, all to undermine a candidate he should rather have embraced as an heir to his better self. The former President left the campaign trail diminished and discredited.

The art of graceful losing was never among Bill Clinton's strengths, and it might be said that he is now so compromised a figure that Barack Obama would be better off without his support. This is not, however, how American politics operates, especially not when the presidency is at stake. If Mr Obama cannot unite leading party figures, including former opponents and even former presidents around him, his campaign will be weaker than it should be. Especially after such a divisive primary season, it must be all hands on deck – and that includes not only Mrs Clinton, but her disappointed and ill-tempered husband, too.

Since Mr Obama won the Democrat nomination, Mr Clinton's expressions of support have been distinctly lukewarm and conspicuously few and far between. There have been reports of disdain and rank-pulling on the former President's side. A meeting between the two men, expected this week, is clearly long overdue. If both Clintons can recognise in the Democratic Party nominee many of those same qualities that took the unfancied "man from Hope" to the White House, Barack Obama will be that much closer to having a winning team.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Post a comment

Limit: 1000 characters

Comment
Your details

* Required field

View all comments that have been posted about this article

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP address logged and may be used to prevent further submissions. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by Independent.co.uk's Terms of Use

Very reasoned analysis, and exactly why Obama will likely lose the election...Barak must prove that he is capable of uniting this country...If he can't reach out to members of his own party...or the pastor of his church...and get them to see the light...how on earth is he going to convince anyone he can really accomplish meaningful "change". If Barak wins he becomes the next Jimmy Carter...the opposition will simply sit on their hands and watch this country go down the tubes.

Posted by keiker | 01.07.08, 18:00 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Contact details

I think Bill is so disappointed in not being able to get another crack at the White House intern pool, that he will be a complete drag on the democratic party's fortunes. He has gone from being a positive influence to a Bush like specter of his former self. I've always felt that his moral anchor was to small to hold him steady, but now it seems his petulance will diminish his political reputation to the same dimensions as his moral reputation.

Posted by jwpulliam | 01.07.08, 14:28 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Contact details

It seems incredible to me that much positive can be thought or said of any man who, as leader of the free world, thought standing in the Oval Office with his trews round his ankles wondering what to do with his cigar... and then lying about the whole thing... was a smart, statesmanlike move likely to serve his nation and its allies well.

But then, look what we have to compare him to.

Posted by Peter | 01.07.08, 10:27 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Contact details

I agree with you that: 'Since Mr Obama won the Democrat nomination, Mr Clinton's expressions of support have been distinctly lukewarm and conspicuously few and far between'
I think too much acrimonious attacks have left Clintons as bad losers. I still admire Clinton, but can't imagine Hillary and Obama running as mates in coming elections. It is not fashionable now a days to condemn people because of colour, but there are reports that many voters might refrain from voting for Obama because of that. I am personally for Obama. Unbelievable to see a black President of USA. How USA has matured in the last 60 years!

Posted by SharifL | 01.07.08, 08:33 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Contact details

Columnist Comments

steve_richards

Steve Richards: People look to the state in their hour of need

Gordon Brown has the courage to put the case for government intervention

dominic_lawson

Dominic Lawson: Meet the new Obama, master of the U-turn

Some of those most captivated are now feeling distinctly queasy

terence_blacker

Terence Blacker: Why we hark back to the old certainties

Does Britain represent heritage or the future? Dynamism or niceness?


Most popular in Opinion