Politico reporter Daniel Libit sends me this query:
Working on a story with another reporter about the increasing similarity between Barack Obama’s policies and Hillary Clinton’s primary platform and whether Democrats might have viewed the primary differently if they knew then what they know now. Would love to get your thoughts on the state of buyer’s remorse. Might you be able to send me something before day’s out?
Ferchristsake. Please, please spare us any more Drudgico stories about "the left." Dredging up the primaries is nothing more than cheap link bait, designed to create a story where none exists. The left has been pushing Obama hard from the moment he took office, which seems to come as a surprise to the denizens of the village who assumed that everyone would spend the next four years sitting around playing the "I Got A Crush on Obama" Youtube on a loop while muttering "yes we can" under our breath. The only one who who seems to have actually done that is Tom Hayden, and when he finally looked up he felt, like, so totally betrayed.
Clinton and Obama are both mainstream Democrats who occupy exactly the same political terrain in the party and always did. That's what made the primary so bloody. It was about personal identification, style and aspiration --- the differences between the two camps were never about policy because there was no substantial difference in their policies.
This is a trumped up story about nothing. But then, that's the Politico's specialty.