Next Round: Obama and Clinton Over the Economy?
EmailABC News’ Eloise Harper and Sunlen Miller Report: A new battlefront may be forming in the Democratic nomination fight with the leading candidates both arguing Monday that they can best handle the nation’s economy.
Sen. Hillary Clinton D-N.Y., often talks about the work she’s going to have to do to clean up the White House and today she suggested that a Clinton would be suited for the job. "There seems to be a pattern here: It takes a Clinton to clean up after a Bush."
After critiquing the Bush administration and outlining the staggering problems with the American economy Clinton took on Sen. Barack Obama (not by name) while delivering her speech on the economy in Knoxville, Iowa.
"More than ever before, workers will need good job training for the jobs of this new century, but there is one job we can’t afford on- the-job training for: That is the job of our next president. That could be the costliest job training in history," she said.
For his part, Obama, D-Ill., signaled he’s ready to debate Senator Clinton on the economy.
"I am happy to compare my experience to hers when it comes to the economy," Obama retaliated at a press conference Ft. Dodge, Iowa. "My understanding was that she wasn’t treasury secretary in the Clinton administration."
Obama challenged Clinton to show her experience and divulge their differences over economic policy, "Rather than just assert experience, if she has specific differences with me with respect to economic policy
Rhetoric between the top two Democratic presidential candidates has stepped up recently since the Democratic Debate on November 15th when Clinton took on Obama directly by name. The escalation prompted Obama spokesperson Bill Burton to respond to Clinton’s new sharper critique. "It was just nine days ago that Hillary Clinton told 9,000 Iowa Democrats that she wasn’t going to attack other Democrats. Obviously that has changed as it has become clear we’ll be holding a caucus, not a coronation, in Iowa."
Gulf of Mexico to Become Gulf of America? 
Can Mitt Romney Win Conservatives Back?
Obama is an arrogant and conceited Presidential wanne-be who can’t even serve his own state of Illinois. It is a shame that he has the worst attendance record. This naive oaf doesn’t have what it takes to be President. He reminds me of a fly.
Posted by: Troy | November 19, 2007, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
Wow Troy! Is arrogant and conceited your way of saying he’s “uppety”.
P.S He graduated from Harvard LAW with honors…how can you call him an oaf!
Posted by: james | November 19, 2007, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm
They say; show me your friend and I will tell you who you are. A close look at the type of comments this lady’s commentators make are a mirror to her qualities. Could this be the reason why they say; “birds of the same feather flop together?”
Posted by: Charles | November 20, 2007, 12:21 am 12:21 am
Troy I agree with everything you said. So Obama graduated Harvard Law with honors. What honors, the honor roll? He certainly didn’t make the grade of being intelligent. Yes, he is desperate to become president because he’s black and because he want’s that power over the courts in cases like the “Jena 6″. He may have other people fooled but he doesn’t fool me. There are not that many changes to be made and he’s too dumb to make them. Harvard did nothing for him but push him thru to graduate. He will never be president because America is not ready for him. If he wins in Iowa so what? There are 50 states and he’s not going to win them.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | November 20, 2007, 6:19 am 6:19 am
To Harper & Miller. Your report on Hillary is garbage. It is Obama that has been bashing Clinton for a long time until he finally let up. He is a desperate candidate and he knows it. So what if he wins in Iowa. There are 50 states and he will not win the majority of them if that’s what your hoping for. There appears to be a lot of jealousy regarding Hillary because she is the frontrunner and many of the news media are trying also to sway peoples votes by false stories like Novak. People claim Obama is so smart, where? He fell for Novak’s story like a fool. Would he be a fool as president, which he will never be to begin with. He might as well dream about it but in all its not going to be.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | November 20, 2007, 6:28 am 6:28 am
James: There are graduates from Harvard Law school that are ten times smarter than Obama will ever be. Graduating from Harvard doesn’t make you smart unless you know how to use your brains and I think Obama left them somewhere because he certainly doesn’t know how to use them. Why don’t you face reality. No matter how hard he campaigns and how many lies he tells the audience he is not going to become president of the United States. It just won’t happen now and it may never happen. America needs someone that can think and that does not include him or een Edwards. Obama better stay as senator and he’s lucky to be that.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | November 20, 2007, 6:36 am 6:36 am
Me likes. Sounds like the Hillary crew has resorted to petty attacks since her campaign is fading into the darkness. It makes me laugh to hear you people question Obama’s intelligence when your hateful, ignorant comments prove that your combined brainpower wouldn’t have enough juice to light the LED on my keychain. If you have real concerns that an actual voter may have, feel free to bring it up. if your just lashing out becasue your lives are in shambles because of the very political quagmire anyone but Obama would perpetuate, just leave it to informed Americans to bail you out. By the way, you should check out the polls in Chicago. You would see that he has an over 70% approval rating from those people in Illinois that you say are not being well served. Maybe since they have seen him in action up close, they realize that he would do more for Chicago and America as president than running into the brick wall of our currently grid-locked senate.
Posted by: Aris-D | November 20, 2007, 7:27 am 7:27 am
Hillary is flaming out like Howard Dean in 2004. The latest ABC Iowa poll shows: Obama 30, Hillary 26, Silky 22. Of course, anybody who points out her weaknesses is simply a sexist.
As for Obama, graduating from Harvard does not necessarily make one smart….that’s what every liberal is obligated to say when confronted with W’s Master’s degree from Harvard School of Business. Obama has no experience, except at ducking controversial votes in the IL state senate. Of course, anybody who points out his weaknesses is simply a racist.
And now every major Dem in the presidential race is on record supporting drivers licenses for ILLEGAL aliens, when 2/3 of the American people oppose it.
Pelosi and Reid are now ZERO for 41 on anti-war legislation–even as the NYT, LAT, AP, WaPo, and Reuters are all proclaiming a successful Surge in Iraq. Votes to lose the War will only get scarcer, while the Kossacks only grow angrier. Watch for the Implosion.
Ron Paul will likely run as an independent and split off the anti-war vote. He should hire Ralph Nader to advise him on how to hurt Democrats in close races.
The Dem’s are trying really hard to snatch defeat from the jaws of what should be a certain victory next November. Enjoy!
Posted by: Pain in the Donkey | November 20, 2007, 9:07 am 9:07 am
Clinton, Edwards and Obama have never led a large organizations (50,000+ people), balanced budgets, been accountable for wins and losses in the public or government sectors. Based on their past records the only way they have somewhat tried to simulate the economy is through federal pork or earmarks based on taxes which are part of the problem with today’s economy – the large federal deficits. What most Americans want is a smaller federal government infrastructure by reducing federal employees and their benefits, smaller federal real estate footprint, and lower taxes for all classes. I am of the mind, that I would not trust any politicians from New York State (Giuliani and Clinton) or any current member of Congress with executive fiduciary responsibility and the economy. Why do so many New Yorkers move out of New York State every year? I will tell you why, sky-rocketing NY State and municipal taxes, high cost of living, over-population and poor quality of life issues for families and children. Senator Clinton and Mr. Giuliani fix these problems in your state first, then run for the presidency. How can we ever trust you both with the problems of the federal government, when you failed to fix the problems of your own home state?
Posted by: threeriverscrossing | November 20, 2007, 10:59 am 10:59 am
OK here it is…obama absolutely from the start has been criticizing hillary as tho there were no GW to criticize! there is no way in the world he should be running for president. but the media boys have given him a free ride all the way and have succeeded in building him up so they’ll have a ‘story’ to run. disgusting. does anyone care that obama is playing the republicans game? to tear down the front runner and run against the no chancer! and…o yeah…i’m black so don’t even go there…
Posted by: Annoyed | November 20, 2007, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
HRC was the Treasury Secretary, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Interior, National Security Advisor, etc., in the Clinton administration… right? I mean where else could she have gotten all of this “applied” experience she’s touting in the areas of the economy, environment, national security, etc. (I concede education because HRC has been a child and educational advocate for years)? Funny, if memory serves, the one area officially appointed to and controlled by HRC during the Clinton presidency was the healthcare issue and that was a disastorous failure. Is anyone else aware of some recess appointment or shadow position in the administration HRC held and if so, then she should disclose that information and be given proper credit or criticism for her performance during that tenure. Until then, will someone please explain why we’re supposed to believe that 8 years of being a “First Lady” somehow allowed HRC to vicariously hold every major cabinet position in the Clinton administration? Give HRC due credit and respect for her years in the Senate and judge her accordingly on her votes and stated positions, but it insults the intelligence of anyone who can hear to suggest that she is somehow battle-tested and more experienced than others just because she lived in the White House and advised her spouse… like most spouses do everyday, everywhere.
Posted by: WindsOfChange | November 21, 2007, 4:00 am 4:00 am
Obama’s plan is definately better.we have to look at issues not persons,race or gender.we must not be emotional in our decisions,rather we have to be very rational if we don’t want to continue with the mess we are currently in.
Senator Clinton has supported nearly all of president Bush’s policies with her vote.I wonder how she intend to change America when she has been supportive of the last two regimes.Everybody knows that Obama is honesty personified.His position has never been in doubt.He opposed all of Bush’s policies that went bad.He is consistent,he is the best.
Posted by: Eronss | November 21, 2007, 4:26 am 4:26 am
The greatest mistake of the Presidential debates was having Clinton and Obama together which offered him on the job training while they were happening.
This problem reduced the differences between them because Obama followed Hillary’s lead most of the time.
This is why there are no differences in their campaign. Had they been separate, the public would have seen her expertise and would have seen his unreadiness.
Any future debates should be separate but it’s probably too late to expose the distinctions between them.
Posted by: Pat | March 18, 2008, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm