Bill Clinton: Asset or Liability?

The 2008 Presidential race has become the longest campaign in American history. Not only has it become the longest, but also the most diverse. The democratic primary race has a woman and an African American as front runners who stand a chance to becoming president. What's more, historically speaking, a former First Lady has stepped up to the forefront to run for office. But before America can catch up to other nations in the western world in electing its first female president, there are some questions that need to be answered. For the sake of space, this article will only focus on one: Is Bill Clinton an asset or liability?

Democrats and Republicans all admit to Bill Clinton's keen political talent. Specifically, his drive is recognized as one which surpasses others, making him a formidable opponent, even if he is not the one running for office. The former two-term president enjoys popularity that crosses party lines, a rare phenomenon in the world of divisive politics. His likability ratings are high among democrats, in depends, and 30% of republicans. Not only for his masterful oratory skill, but for his ability to turn an election around to his and other democrats favor. Bill Clinton is a major plus to democrats who are tired of losing elections.

While Clinton became politically polarizing in the eyes of the mainstream media, he left office with a high approval rating. Having created 22 million new jobs, balancing the budget, signing the Family Medical Leave Act, covering millions of uninsured children through the Children's' Health Insurance Program, increasing after school programs, cutting crime rates down to their lowest in 40 years, the public showed its support. For his efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East in combating terrorism, the public stood by him amidst media claims of 'wag the dog'. During the House Impeachment, the public supported their president with a 73% approval rating, and punished the republicans in the mid-term election.

Through out the 90's, the Clinton White House was bombarded by controversy after controversy. Whitewater, File gate, and Vince Foster's death among others, occupied much media attention and strained the government with bitter partisanship. The investigations cost the tax payer $70 million, only to end with complete exoneration of any wrong doing on the part of the administration, Bill Clinton, and Hillary Clinton. Which all begs the question: If Hillary Clinton is indeed elected president, how could the previous Clinton administration controversies be revived in the next Clinton administration, if those controversies ended with complete exoneration? What of new controversies? Every president since Gen. Washington has undergone scrutiny and controversy. With the Medias mistrust in government officials, and the peoples weakening faith in federal institutions, it is a guarantee that whoever is elected in 2008, we will see controversy. The real matter is whether there's anything to the accusations. With the Clinton's, the people have already answered the questions through the trials and errors of the 90's. Through it all, the people learned of their management skills, and their back ground. But with someone else like Obama and Edwards, the usual questions of effectiveness and intellectual ability will need to be answered, and they will be answered through controversy. In these troubled times, with two wars and the Middle East peace process at a stand still, the newly elected president will have to be known and trusted by the people.

Iowa and New Hampshire play important roles in our elective system. The people who caucus get a first, up close and personal look at these candidates. 120,000 democrats caucused in Iowa, while breaking record turnout, it is less than 1/10 of 1% out of 300 million American citizens, and has little impact on the turn out of the overall primary race to the nominations. The question of electability or experience will not be decided by two early states, but will be decided by the American people as a whole. Most Americans will vote for her based on her own merits, but some will vote for her because of their support for the man she's married to. Remembering the progress and growth of the 1990's, people will vote for Hillary for the return of those days of peace and prosperity.
Democratic voters also know the Clinton crisis management style and how it stands the heat. Administrative style is the most important characteristic a leader has, and will be an important motivation for voters to vote Hillary in.

Republicans in the early states have their concerns. About half of them dislike Bill Clinton's policies and actions as president. While they admit he has fire and determination, they either distrust his sincerity and/or disagree with his views on social issues. If Hillary gains the democratic nomination and wins the general election, republicans and some independents are worried about Bill Clinton's role in his wife's government. They worry about him overstepping the lines and quota of 'one president at a time'. They also have fears in Hillary herself, though I suspect every time a conservative talk show host says something negative about her, hundreds of conservative fans repeat the words to those they know. However, there are those who are sincerely concerned with electing a woman to office when the main attention for the next president will be the Middle East. While the Middle East and South East Asia are traditionally, culturally conservative, it has yet to hamper a foreign woman leader to accomplish major strides in international-eastern relations. This is another area in which the previous Clinton Administration helps Hillary. For instance, under his administration, he appointed the very first female Secretary of State: Madeline Albright. Madam Secretary Albright strengthened relations with Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, and the United Arabian Emirates. Her handling with India, Israel, Palestine, and Syria brought about the 2000 Camp David Negotiations that almost resulted in a signed Middle East Peace Agreement. That agreement would not have been possible with out the dedication of Bill Clinton, and the effectiveness of Albright's negotiation skills with Middle-Eastern leaders. Sex played no role in her ability to be an effective Secretary of State.

During the 90's, the world saw President Clinton become the most international presidents in American history. He strengthened open dialogues between nations, regained Americas standing in the world, and made it possible for more democracies find footing than at any other time in world history. Along side he was Hillary Clinton, who worked on AIDS efforts, human rights, women's rights, childcare, adult literacy, hunger, malaria, and other ills of the world. The American people yearn for the return of that stability and progress, and this can only help Hillary in her effort to be the next leader of the free world.

In conclusion, does Bill Clinton help or hurt his wife's candidacy? His campaign skills, political intellect, and drive are all unmatched. As campaigner, he is clearly an asset in both primary elections and the general election. His presidency helps with both name recognition and experience. The Clinton presidency record helps more than it hurts. Upon leaving office, Bill Clinton's likability and approval ratings have risen. In part, this can be attributed to Bushes unpopularity, but it also can be attributed to Clintons Foundation in addressing some of the biggest obstacles. Opponents claim he has been acting irresponsible in this work, crying 'one president at a time', but overall, the public strongly supports these efforts. Americas standing in the world has improved some already thanks for the Foundations work in over 90 countries, helping over 100 million people directly. This reveals how the public would respond to his involvement in another Clinton Administration. But what would that role be?

Whatever Hillary wants it to be; only it can't be a cabinet position. It's likely the former president would work as a roaming ambassador, working to repair Americas standing internationally. He, along with Hillary, knows most of the world's leaders and can instantly reshape the world's view of the US. Bill Clintons work with his foundation would be able to continue, thus keeping him busy and out of the everyday functions of the White House. America needs leadership. For that leadership to be effective, it must be known and understood by the public. It must be trusted internationally, so that relations can normalize. Through his knowledge and experience, Bill Clinton can negotiate with world leaders in service of Madam President Clinton and the American people. Both the Clintons, together as a team, can work to clean up the mess by Bush and his team. The American people, and the world, can benefit from having Hillary at the forefront of decision making, and by having Bill Clinton pushing for open dialogue. There will be no question as to who would be in charge; Hillary would be the executive with the knowledge only an executive can posses. Bill Clinton would be an asset to her general election campaign, and would be an asset to the American people if Hillary were to be elected president.