By DEBORAH ORIN Washington Bureau Chief

November 8, 2002 -- Former President Bill Clinton yesterday defended the performance of his handpicked Democratic national chairman, Terry McAuliffe, as grumbling grew over the roles of both Clinton and McAuliffe in the Democrats' Election Day debacle.

It was another sign the rifts in the bloodied Democratic Party aren't just left-right, but also over whom to blame and how to come back after Republicans won control of the Senate and enlarged their House majority.

Some gloomy Democrats said the fact their establishment is closing ranks means they may have to suffer more big losses - say in 2004 - before Democrats are ready to rethink the duck-the-issues approach that backfired on Tuesday and move forward.

Clinton was solid in his support of McAuliffe.

"He absolutely supports Terry remaining as chairman of the Democratic National Committee," said spokesman Jim Kennedy.

He also rejected the arguments of critics who say that in states like Florida and Arkansas, Clinton's campaign stumping did more to rev up anti-Clinton Republicans than to inspire the Democratic base - especially given the low turnout among African-Americans. "President Clinton and President Bush both campaigned in a number of places where Democrats won and Republicans lost. So any suggestion of backlash flies in the face of the facts," Kennedy said.

Clinton has stayed uncharacteristically quiet since the debacle, after taking an unusually high-profile role at the end of the campaign, where he cast himself as leader of the opposition and stumped against Bush and his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush - who won in a landslide.

A number of Democrats were critical of McAuliffe privately, but the fact that they were only willing to do so anonymously suggests that if there is a rebellion, it's not yet serious - though some insiders say that depends on whether big donors will speak out.

But instead of dumping McAuliffe, the Democratic rumor mill said some former Clinton White House aides like John Podesta might be recruited to bolster the DNC - strengthening rather than weakening Clinton's hold on the party apparatus.

-- Anonymous, November 08, 2002

Answers

Well, we can't expect Clinton to admit his, shall we say 'performance,' had anything to do with it, can we?

If piaps loses in 2004 [does she have to run to keep her seat or is that to be 2006?] that will show a lack of support of the Clintons by the DNC. Not sure if she has to run for senate again in 2004, but if she runs for president [shudder!!!] oh! I just can't think about it.

-- Anonymous, November 08, 2002