Obama and Clinton: A Study in Contrasts
EmailABC News’ Kate Snow and Eloise Harper report: “This is the moment! This is our time! vs. “I’ve been making positive change in people’s lives for 35 years."
Aretha Franklin’s “Think” vs. A barbershop quartet singing “It’s a Small World After All.”
Attending separate events with Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. and Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, on the same bitter cold day two days after Christmas in Iowa is a study in contrasts.
In Des Moines Thursday morning, Obama’s voice was raised, his inflection full. He never named names, but frequently made reference to his opponents. Voters talked about an excitement in the room. He closed his speech with a rousing call to Democratic voters.
“If you will stand for change so that our children have the same chance that somebody gave us; if you’ll stand to keep the American dream alive for those who still hunger for opportunity and thirst for justice; if you’re ready to stop settling for what the cynics tell you you must accept, and finally reach for what you know is possible, then we will win this caucus, we will win this election, we will change the course of history, and the real journey –- to heal a nation and repair the world -– will have truly begun,” he said.
The crowd bolted up in a standing ovation.
Clinton, in contrast, spoke in more measured tones. In Carroll, Iowa Thursday afternoon she criticized the Bush administration but rarely referred to her Democratic opponents. The closing lines of her remarks were enunciated in a firm, almost understated voice — the sort of low volume technique of a teacher speaking with emphasis to make sure the class is listening.
The audience listened intently.
"The stakes could not be higher and I’m asking that you go and stand up for our democracy, for our country, for our future and if you stand up for me I promise that I will wage a campaign that respects our values as a nation and stands up for our principles. And then when I am President I will think about the people I have met here in Iowa. I’ll think about your faces that I have seen and the stories that I have heard and I’ll get up every day worrying about what I can do to try to keep faith with all of you,” she said.
The crowd applauded.
It’s not that Clinton didn’t draw a response. When she said the next President would be greeted by a stack of problems on the desk in the Oval Office, including “a war to end in Iraq” the crowd agreed loudly. There were hoots of approval when she said she would simplify the application process for college student aid.
And when Clinton told the moving story of a young soldier who suffered a traumatic brain injury in Iraq, people were visibly moved.
But as one voter who is trying to decide between Obama and Clinton put it, the two candidates simply have a different “presentation” style. And it is noticeable to anyone who has seen them both.
Even the introductions offered a contrast.
Obama was introduced by Gen. Merrill “Tony” McPeak, former chief of staff of the Air Force during the Clinton administration.
Gen. McPeak said he thought Obama had the judgment to be Commander-in-Chief and took some not-so-subtle swipes at Hillary Clinton.
“The gap between him and the other candidates here is really pretty wide when you stop and think about it,” McPeak said. He called Obama a “tough guy” who is “real—in here, underneath the t-shirt” and has presented himself consistently to Iowa voters.
“The first time he came to Iowa he was the same Barack Obama as the fifth time, the tenth time… He didn’t come a month later with a warm and fuzzy approach,” McPeak said, referring to the Clinton campaign’s more personal appeals of late.
In contrast, Clinton was introduced by a fruit farmer from upstate New York who talked about how devoted Clinton is to the issues facing her constituents — including issues specific to agriculture and orchards.
“We need someone who is tested,” said Mark Nicholson, of Red Jacket Orchards in Geneva, N.Y. He said he wouldn’t have traveled all the way to Iowa if he didn’t believe strongly that voters should choose Clinton.
The atmospherics were different too.
Before Obama arrived, the predominantly young to middle-aged crowd packed into a Masonic center in downtown Des Moines listened to Indie rock and funk.
In addition to Aretha Franklin, Obama’s team played “Ain’t No Stopping Us Now” by McFadden & Whitehead; “Hold On, I’m Coming” by Sam and Dave; “The Adventure” by Angels and Airwaves; “Better Days” by the Goo Goo Dolls and “Move Along” by the All American Rejects.
Before Sen. Clinton arrived, a teacher took the stage and thanked retirees for taking time away from their Christmas vacations to attend.
The Clinton crowd was entertained by “The Voice Exchange”—a barbershop quartet. They sang such old favorites as “M-I-C-K-E-Y M-O-U-S-E,” “I’m Proud to Be an American” by Lee Greenwood and a ditty about a woman with a fake wooden leg.
About 30 minutes before Sen. Clinton arrived, staffers removed curtain barricades that had been walling off the back corners of empty seats in the auditorium. Like Obama’s event, the Clinton event was filled to capacity, standing-room only.
In addition to the quartet, Clinton also had a soundtrack. Today it included “Working 9 to 5” by Dolly Parton and the theme song from "The Devil Wears Prada”—“Suddenly I See” by KT Tunstall (at least twice). “Life is a Highway” (from “The Cars” movie) is a favorite. The Police (“Every Little Thing She Does is Magic”) make an appearance and Bon Jovi’s “Who Says You Can’t Go Home?” is a relatively new addition.
There is at least one musical commonality. At both events today, the candidates signed autographs to the tune “Shining Star” by Earth, Wind & Fire.
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
The media has made it in to a two-person race between the two LEAST experienced candidates on the Democrat side, while stellar candidates who would be nearly impossible for ANY Republican to beat are HIDDEN. I tend to believe that most things just don’t happen and so the intention would seem to be to try to make the public think that their favorite candidate, that is not named Clinton or Obama, has no chance to win so come and join a winning bandwagon. Sadly, I think it works to a large extent. Secondly, I believe corporate America and the Military Industrial Complex would prefer another Republican lap dog president, or Hillary who takes lots of their money now. So, by eliminating probably 5 of the BEST Dem candidates IN decades they increase the chance that a Republican will win. They also know that Hillary polarizes people (love her / hate her) and she may not be able to carry the independent vote. In a general election, Obama has so little to hang his hat on experience-wise and he will get creamed with swiftvote ads painting him as some wonder boy who hasn’t a clue yet. Let’s be honest, Dodd, Biden and Kucinich have more experience than all of the candidates on both sides BY FAR, less maybe McCain, but he still thinks Iraq is a good thing. I personally think if you look at what America needs and you hear him point by point, issue by issue, Kucinich is on another level and his voting record is IMPECCABLE while most of these candidates barely pass on domestic issues (Patriot Act, Bankruptcy Bill,) and foreign policy (NAFTA treaties, China trade agreements). Kucincih can reverse a destructive future ofr the USA, but I guess he’s too short.
Posted by: Dogface | December 27, 2007, 10:22 pm 10:22 pm
They’re both the same
Posted by: steve | December 27, 2007, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
This is no time for an incompetent flip-flopper like Hillary to be in the White House. The root of our problems is that Bill Clinton did not nail Bin Laden when he could. The first WTC attack came in 1993 under Clinton. When you try to bring down 2 buildings with 50,000 people in them, that’s like trying to attack America with a nuclear bomb. The weak Clinton allowed Bin Laden to plan the second attack. Bush would not have had an excuse for Iraq if Bin Laden hadn’t brought down the towers in 2001. Hillary, Edwards and Biden voted for the Iraq war – simply parroting what Bush told them. Obama not only spoke out against it, but was able to say where it would take us. Again, with Iran, Hillary rushed to vote for the saber-rattling Kyl-Lieberman bill. We need a brilliant president who can guide us through unprecedented danger. Obama’s the man.
Posted by: julianbook | December 28, 2007, 2:36 am 2:36 am
Oh please…Obama is not qualified. The “Hillary” fear has these “good ol’ boys panties in a bunch.” Go Hillary..more experience and best candidate. Who do you think can beat the GOP, and who do you think they are afraid of? It sure isn’t Obama!
Posted by: Sandra Lea | December 28, 2007, 6:30 am 6:30 am
All you dems if you want to save your party from a painful death vote Obama.He is the only hope for your party which is lost in the day to day problems facing our great country like terrorism, Bhutto,IRAQ, econmy, taxes and healthcare.The Clinton administration is reponsible for the current mess.If Clinton had pulled the trigger before Osama went bad Bhutoo will still be alive.It is time to reject the Clintons and vote for a new leader, new direction, and a charismatic leader.I am a republican wellwisher and want to preserve our strong two party system.Vote Obama as he is the only one who will deliver.
Posted by: Nathan | December 28, 2007, 7:30 am 7:30 am
Nathan – the Clintons are responsible for the current mess? I beg to differ strongly. Who the hell has been in the white house for the last 8 years? Has Bush and Cheney found Osama and Zawahri?
No. Why? Because Musharraf is blocking us from getting the job done. He has to get into bed with Al Qaeda and his own military to keep his country from imploding. I think we should do like the Turks do and say “The hell with it” and start carpet bombing the mountains where the cowardly terrorists hide. Once leveled we should then invade Pakistan and start a death hunt for any and all Al Qaeda holdouts
Posted by: Bob | December 28, 2007, 9:00 am 9:00 am
Well it seems that ABC is trying to shift gears now it is evident that Iowa will go Clinton. The media needs to do a better job at presenting the issues that really matter to the People of this country not their own commercial interests. ABC along with MSNBC have been very biaised…in their critisizing Clinton; thanks God at the end of the day the People are smarter and will vote with their head. You guys will never get an interview with the Clintons when Hillary is elected. It is a real shame that ABC has chosen to be so narrow-minded….and they shall suffer the consequences in their ratings.
Posted by: ALBERTO | December 28, 2007, 9:11 am 9:11 am
obama do not have insurance for the people after they retire hillary have one plus she have donne good for the pour people hope you tink before you vote for obama we need a president like hillary
you want a president name obama
Posted by: magella | December 28, 2007, 9:24 am 9:24 am
I don’t think it is a given that Clinton will get Iowa at all. For her campaign to work she will need to, a second place there by any measure will be a devesatating blow. Whereas Obama wins wether he carries the state or not. Ideally, he needs to get Biden and Kucinich to throw their support to him as VP and Sec of State. With those two in his cabinet, he is not only electable, he sets himself up for a great administration.
Posted by: Louis | December 28, 2007, 9:35 am 9:35 am
This comparative contrast in styles between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama is not only revealing about the candidates but the selling and branding of the two candidates. Is this is what we come to expect of our political process; superficial, shiny, and salesmanship of political cheese. Too bad that Robert Altman is not around to direct their political movie. Both Senators come off like a real estate saleswoman and stereo salesman with just barely enough knowledge to sell their product. As for the music, it’s perfect for them – commercialize music.
Posted by: threeriverscrossing | December 28, 2007, 9:52 am 9:52 am
As I say now I’ve said it before. Obama does’nt have the experience to be President. He said to look a Hillary’s decition making, how she thinks like when she voted on the Iraq war.You know what she said time in and time out with the info she had then she voted for the war. If Bush was telling the truth in the first place. She never would have voted for the war. I was even for the war. Everyone was. All America was behind Bush most of us anyway. You know Obama did not even vote. Why? soo that he can say I was not for the war. Well at least Hillary voted and did her job on an important issue. And when Obama was ask about him not voting on that issue. he said i made a mistake not voting. I regret that now. Well Hillary is saying the samething. That if she knew what she knew now she would not have have voting yes for the war. So why are people on Hillary for this,and why is Obama hitting Hillary hard on this. I donot think that he is hearing himself. Look folks we need experience more than ever. Not some greeney that says and hopes for change. Obama does’nt have the exp. to be President. He just does’nt and all the sound bits will not change this. Hillary is the one to handle what is going one in the M.east. She knows how to handle talking and dealing with this kind of thing.. Obama is handsome and has a great personallty.However it will not get him far in the White House. He is not J.F.K. and never will be. The Kennedy’s where groomed for a polical future. They were groomed for the White House for years. There’s were a Dynasty. So J.F.K. only having two yrs. in the Senate was only part of his training. There father made sure that there life was based on Public Service and made sure they were educated to take over the White House someday.This is a different time. And We need Hillary to be the force that will guide us back to a future that is bright. With the world respecting us again. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE A TRAINEY IN THE WHITE HOUSE. WE NEED SOMEONE WHO CAN DO THE JOB.NOT ON THE JOB TRAINING LIKE OBAMA WILL BE DOING. OBAMA EVEN HAS BILL CLITON’S OLD ADVISERS. WELL FOR SOMEONE WHO WANTS CHANGE HE IS GOING BACK THE OLD WAYS BE EMPLOYING CLINTON’S OLD STAFF. NOW HILLARY DOES’NT HAVE THEM ON HER STAFF SO WHO IS MOVING INTO THE FUTURE.SOME OF HER OLD IDEAS ARE GOOD. HOWEVER HILLARY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN CHANGE THINGS. TO MOVE INTO THE FUTURE.SHE HAS A NEW SET OF ADVISORS.. WE CANNOT AFFORD OBAMA’S NIAVETY. WE CANNOT AFFORD ANOTHER BUSH PRESIDENT THAT LISTEN TO EVERYONE ELSE FOR HIS ADVISE. WE NEED HILLARY. SHE THINKS FOR HERSELF LISTENS TO PEOPLE IF NEED BE. BUT MAKES UP HER MIND. THAT IS WHAT A PRESIDENT DOES. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU REMEMBER THAT WHEN GOING TO THE POLLS. WE NEED HILLARY WHO CAN DO THE JOB THE FIRST DAY IN OFFICE. WE NEED A BETTER TOMMORROW AND HILLARY WILL HELP US GET IT… GREG…
Posted by: greg | December 28, 2007, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
I too am a republican wellwisher and want to preserve our strong two party system and want to help our good friends across the aisle, the Democrats by giving them some advice.
If you cannot decide between Hillary and Obama choose both! One to run for President and the other as Vice-President. It doesn’t matter who is what, they are both soooo cool and everything.
Posted by: zqll | December 28, 2007, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
Hillary and the other candidates who were serving at the time knew more about the state of Iraq before the illegal invasion than they put off. In fact, Dennis Kucinich did the research before the Iraq vote and it was clear to him that nothing had changed in Iraq and that they were not an imminent threat to America. He also summarized his research in a report taht he provided to all of the other Senators and Representatives, which includes Biden, Clinton, Edwards and Dodd. He then encouraged them to join him in voting against giving the President approval to attack Iraq if approved by the UN bu they decided to vote for authorization any way. Bush bypassed the UN even though he had promised (big surprise) and the rest is history. Biden, Clinton, Dodd and Obama have all voted every time to re-authorize funds for Iraq, which seems contradictory to all of the tough talk to have clearer objectives and some time-line out. Kucincih of course, has stayed committed to his convictions and has voted against any more funds other than those to bring our troops home and replace them with a United Nations peacekeeping mission. For some reason, he gets no credit for this, while the press touts Obama as the change agent who opposes the war. Finally, we have a candidate who came from no where and has always voted with integrity and represented the citizens of America first and not coprorate America and his reward, no one knows who the (bleep!) he is. That is most likely because he poses a real threat to Corporate America, the Oil Companies and the Military Industrial Complex, that actually run this country as much as we all hate to admit this. For real change, we shoudl all vote for Kucinich. For something else that will vary between so-so change and more of the same, vote for one of the other candidates. In the interim, we should all pray that in 8 years we will still have what resembles our Constitution and that you can still get a decent paying job in America and afford to pay your medical bills without filing bankruptcy.
Posted by: Dogface | December 28, 2007, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Obama’s Church; Cauldron of Division .
Google it.
Posted by: Sherry | December 28, 2007, 9:51 pm 9:51 pm
I’m voting for Obama. The presidency is about vision, integrity, wisdom and IMAGE. In America packaging is everything. Hillary will not win a general election. Not possible. There’s just too much Hillaryhate. People don’t like her. I don’t like her. The woman is just cringeworthy. Biden is great but not the right presence for what the country needs now for a president. However, I do hope we end up with an OBAMA/BIDEN ticket. Chris Dodd I don’t know well. Edwards lacks both temperment and presence. It’s difficult to separate Richardson from the Clintons and that’s unfortunate.
I just want a president that is normal with a normal family – wife, children and hopefully a dog. Obama looks normal. His wife looks normal and the kids act normal. Biden also looks and acts normal.
Posted by: Dee | December 29, 2007, 12:26 am 12:26 am
If the US public elect a person with a name of Barrack Hussain Obama.., it will raise a huge question.
Posted by: Laxman Adhikari | December 29, 2007, 1:31 am 1:31 am
The invasion of Saddam’s Iraq has never been declared illegal by any court that I know of. There has been no trial that has resulted in finding that the invasion was illegal.
President Bush never said that Iraq was an “imminent threat” prior to the invasion.
On the other hand Dennis Kucinich has had close encounters with flying saucers. The following is from the Cleveland newspaper “The Plain Dealer.”
“Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has claimed to have seen a UFO, according to Shirley MacLaine in her new book, “Sage-Ing While Age-Ing.”
Kucinich “had a close sighting over my home in Graham, Washington, when I lived there,” the actress, a close Kucinich friend, wrote. “Dennis found his encounter extremely moving. The smell of roses drew him out to my balcony where, when he looked up, he saw a gigantic triangular craft, silent, and observing him.
“It hovered, soundless, for 10 minutes or so, and sped away with a speed he couldn’t comprehend. He said he felt a connection in his heart and heard directions in his mind.”
Since then he has taken to wearing a little pointed tin-foil cap occasionally.
Posted by: zqll | December 30, 2007, 3:34 am 3:34 am
some of you so called democrats should be ashame of yourself…why the racist comments? When have we chosen a president because of their name. As for as the Clinton are concerned, the 90′s are gone and will never come back and it wasn’t all that good. And yes Bill and Hillary were liars and still are..you cannot change that the truth is the truth. If any of you think there will not be another scandal if Hillary gets the nomination you are kidding yourself…they can’t hide all of their dirt forever..it will come out. Democrats vote for someone that we can be proud of and the name is not Clinton. I am a life long democrat but I am not stupid and I can also read all of the racist comments from fellow democrats…I will not settle for Clinton even if I have to stay home and not vote.
Posted by: larry | December 30, 2007, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm