This phrase has as much relevance now as it did 16 years ago.
Before I begin, I would like to take some time to reflect back on the years President Clinton was in office. These were great years for America. The economy was flourishing, we were at peace, and I had tremendous respect for Clinton's shift toward the center of the political spectrum.
Those years are over now. While Barack Obama doesn't necessarily support the moderate Democrat message, he still is the best candidate to get our country back on the tracks President Clinton laid for us and then some.
Barack Obama faces an increasingly difficult challenge of attracting Clinton voters while still maintaining his message of a change candidate. What better way to affiliate Obama with the Clinton's, yet separate enough, than to adopt Clinton's winning campaign strategy.
However, there are risks to using this strategy. For starters, Obama should use caution with turning the spotlight on the economy if McCain puts Mitt Romney on the ticket. Romney is certainly one of the more knowledgeable politicians when it comes to the economy, and we would need to turn most of our attention toward the war at that point. It would be risky to enter a VP debate with say Wesley Clark for example, and have most of the attention turned toward the economy. It could potentially off-set the advantage of having a foreign-policy expert on the ticket.
It's becoming more likely that McCain will opt for some flare when determining the VP pick, as most are concerned with his age. With that being said, turning a bulk of the attention toward the economy would be an excellent idea.
While it would be risky to focus on the economy if McCain opts for Romney as a VP, it still needs to be done. Obama needs to either fit the economy in with the war, or focus primarily on the economy. Obama has to take advantage of McCain's lack of knowledge concerning the economy. People, for whatever reason, disagree on the war, but nobody can tell you the economy isn't important.
For Obama supporters who are concerned about the thought of Mitt Romney after what I just said, don't be. Obama should still go for someone with foreign policy expertise as his VP. Chuck Hagel, Sam Nunn, Jim Webb, or Joe Biden should still be toward the top of Obama's VP list. Under the assumption that McCain's selects Romney as a VP (pure speculation), anyone of those candidates would be capable of turning an economy discussion into a war discussion during a debate. The cost of the war would be able to hit somebody like Romney hard when talking about the economy, and it would force the debate to turn to a discussion about a never ending war. Anyone of the potential "foreign-policy" candidates would be able to hold their own when debating over the economy.
To conclude, we can't lose when turning the attention toward the economy because we got numbers on our side. Unemployment is up, and the stock market is struggling to say the least. There's no question Obama could hammer McCain in debates on the economy, and I'm confident that any VP foreign policy pick would be able to hold his/her own during VP debates on the economy.