So here we are again: Clinton is in Iowa and New Hampshire trying to fight off a surging outsider. It’s 2008 again. Or is it?
It isn’t, for the following reasons:
1. The debate in 2008 was about personalities and style; the issues this year are substantive. It was very difficult to find any meaningful differences in the Obama and Clinton programs in 2008; the rationales for the Obama candidacy were his opposition to the war in Iraq, his unique abilities as a communicator, and the desire to move past the Clinton sturm und drang. This time, there is an actual debate about single-payer, free public college, and Wall Street regulations.
2. The country has moved past the ongoing Clinton controversies. At least, that is my guess. Those of us who supported Obama in 2008 because we thought the GOP hysteria about the Clintons was unique to them have to admit that Hillary was right about the right-wing conspiracy.
3. The Iraq war vote doesn’t resonate the way it did in 2008. Clinton is partially responsible for the Iran deal, and she doesn’t advocate sending large numbers of American troops to Syria, so pacifists within the party don’t have much to complain about.
4. Obama had the African-American vote; Sanders doesn’t. It won’t matter in Iowa and New Hampshire, but it jolly well will elsewhere.