July 1st, 2014
08:22 PM ET

Should Clinton distance herself from Obama?

Watch "Fareed Zakaria GPS," Sundays at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET on CNN

Today the United States is on a slow recovery, and President Obama's approval ratings are low. That might suggest that the best course would be for Hillary Clinton to distance herself from her former boss.

But Obama, Obamacare, and other policies of this president are very popular among many Democratic groups.And remember, the three people in her shoes who have won all ran on continuity.

Now, Mrs. Clinton's recent memoir suggests that she has not yet made up her mind as to what course she will follow.The book is a carefully calibrated mixture of praise and criticism, loyalty and voice, such that she can plausibly go in whatever direction she chooses.

The world today is different, and Hillary Clinton is in a unique position, especially if she can truly mobilize women voters. But history does suggest that choosing change or continuity will truly be her hard choice.

Watch the video for the full Take or read the WaPo column

Post by:
Topics: Fareed's Take

soundoff (16 Responses)
  1. chri§§y

    This country is definitely ready for a female prez for sure!

    July 1, 2014 at 10:32 pm | Reply
  2. Joey Isotta-Fraschini©

    Hillary Clinton will probably distance herself from Obama's mistakes, but not from him.
    She is infinitely more experienced than Obama was when he became our president. She is also tougher by nature, and her thinking is based on cognitions more realistic than some of Obama's.
    If she runs, she will win.
    The majority of Republicans are too mired in outdated prejudices and rules, which they stupidly perceive as "values," to beat a candidate as formidable as this Democrat, who has kept in touch with the thinking of the people, while thinking independently and in the manner of a leader.
    Religious dogma cannot win another USA presidency: churches continue to close as mosques open. Even atheists affect laws in a time when bloggers cannot differentiate between "affect" and 'effect."
    Ir is not that we need a woman to be president: we need a president as smart ad strong as Hillary Clinton.

    July 2, 2014 at 7:08 am | Reply
  3. Ferhat Balkan

    A recent article published by Wall Street Journal "The Bill and Hillary Clinton Money Machine Taps Corporate Cash" estimated the amount of money the Clintons raised during their campaigns in the past 2 decades to be between $1.3 to 2 BILLION. Of course, not all of it goes to their pocket, but some of it did. So where did all that money come from you may ask? Let's face it, that's A LOT of money. 75% of the money came from US companies and industry. That's 75%. These are the same companies that invested in the Bush presidential campaign. What happens when 3/4 of their money is from corporations? Politicians do their bidding. That's what happens. This is how corporations buy our politicians.

    July 2, 2014 at 10:04 pm | Reply
    • cnposter

      Wull,...yeahbut,...Democrats vs. Republicans and stuff!

      July 5, 2014 at 12:32 pm | Reply
  4. chri§§y

    @ Joey i did NOT say we needed a female prez i said this country is READY for a female prez! Ten years ago we were not. Its a bonus that this particular female has more *ahem* nads than many men!

    July 2, 2014 at 10:22 pm | Reply
  5. Ness

    It's amazing how many Democrats cried like a stuck pig about Republicans being, "Too old; too rich; too elitist; too white; too out of touch, etc., etc."

    Now, what do Democrats claim to LOVE: Hillary – and she's all of those things.....hmmm.....no one likes hypocrisy.....

    July 2, 2014 at 11:42 pm | Reply
  6. chri§§y

    Lol @ Ness ya know what i find amazing? How presumptuous people like you are. First of all you assumed im a Democrat...i am not! Then you assumed that anyone who likes Hilary had to have disliked Republicans...i dont dislike people just because they are republicans! I thought Ron Paul was awesome and wouldve voted for him had he been on the ballot! What i do dislike is the laziness of Congress and i dont care what party they belong to. They are severely underworked and overpaid!

    July 3, 2014 at 12:06 am | Reply
  7. picnick

    Killary Clottin' is the disease of partisan politics.

    She certainly isn't the cure.

    July 4, 2014 at 12:24 am | Reply
  8. chri§§y

    So who is @ picnick? And please dont tell me the one from canada.

    July 4, 2014 at 12:56 am | Reply
  9. Eric

    Yes, it is time for a female president...BUT...Hillary is in no way qualified to lead this country, mostly because she is part of the two-party system. I'd much rather have Jill Stein in office any day so that we can start moving out of the swamp that we've been in for the last 30 years.

    July 4, 2014 at 9:46 am | Reply
  10. Retired Military

    Ms.Clinton has experience and time in service. However, her accomplishments in elected office and as Secretary of State do not rise to the occasion. I am not referring to her failed attempt at "Hillary Care". She was the First Lady and not an elected or appointed official. She has made many personal accomplishments, no doubt. But that is quite another matter. Tangible accomplishments in her official capacity matter. Additionally, and arguably as important, is her propensity to be part of scenarios that bring her integrity into question. This has happened way too many times – it is a trend. Her lack of integrity equates to a significant credibility issue, and all of this before becoming President! As a nation We cannot afford to continue electing people who have these issues. Our Republic is in crisis. We need to come together in order to fix our massive dysfunctional government, not continue partisan divides that only kick the can down the road...a dead end road at that. I agree that we are ready for a woman to be President, but we need to avoid electing a person based in part on his/her "first of their kind" status. That is true political correctness and it is absolutely killing us. This is the Presidency, not a feel good program. We must do better than this.

    July 4, 2014 at 12:36 pm | Reply
  11. cnposter

    Clinton ran Obama's foreign policy. Obama and Clinton should campaign from the hellhole they created in Libya and on the graves of the 160,000 corpses caused by the jihad Obama and Clinton support in Syria. Maybe the 35,000 black victims of the ethnic cleansing Clinton's "activists" continue to visit upon the folks from Tawergha will chip in.

    Clinton can't distance herself from Obama. When it comes to America in the world, Clinton is Obama.

    July 5, 2014 at 12:28 pm | Reply
  12. Mee

    Effective presidents find a way to rise above the fray and work with the opposition constructively. Reagan found a way to work with O'Neill. Clinton found a way to work with Gingrich. Ineffective Presidents fail to find a way. If Hillary Clinton wants to win the election, she should definitely find a way to attach herself to a former President: Bill Clinton. Clinton ran as a centrist and governed as a centrist. This country needs moderate leadership to retake control from the rabble. If Hillary can achieve that, it won't be by highlighting her similarities with Obama. She needs to highlight her differences. Obama does not appeal to moderates any more than Boehner. Both are selfish children that fail to grasp how badly their tantrums have hurt the country.

    July 5, 2014 at 5:12 pm | Reply
    • Retired Military

      Mee: I agree on your assessment of effective Presidencies. I would argue that Mr. Clinton didn't necessarily run as a moderate, but pragmatically moderated to the middle. However Ms. Clinton's past is deeply routed in far left liberalism and the mentorship of Saul Alinsky. She needs to distance herself from the Whitehouse.

      July 5, 2014 at 6:09 pm | Reply
      • Mee

        RM: I can understand your position on Bill Clinton. He did run left of center. But not very far left from my recollection. I do think his second election was different than his first in that regard though. So I can see your point on a shift to the middle. Also agree that Hillary is further left than Bill. Getting far away from Obama would be a wise course for any candidate. Those aren't coattails worth riding. Obama ran as a Beltway outsider and ended up being more partisan and less centrist than most moderates that voted for him expected. Embracing him will do little to entice swing vote moderates. The other question is: can the republicans find a candidate that can appeal to the middle?

        July 5, 2014 at 7:53 pm |
      • Retired Military

        Mee: I think you accurately summarized the current state of affairs for any Democrat running for office over the next two years. It is difficult to know who will rise to the forefront on the Republican side. However, I can say with great certainty that if a Republican becomes President, that person will be held to a much higher standard than our current President. Magically, the media will awaken from its self-imposed slumber.

        July 6, 2014 at 2:20 pm |

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.