Post by Captain Snark on Apr 23, 2015 1:09:32 GMT -5
Hillary Clinton is running for president again, and once again she's relying on her perceived inevitability. Her poll lead in the Democratic race is as big as it was in the spring of 1987, when she went on to lose to Barack Obama. (She blew it before and she can blow it again.) What amuses me is her followers. If you question whether her presidential qualifications are as brilliant as they claim, their response is to go on about what a disaster a Republican victory would be. Well, by that standard any Democrat would be better than any Republican. The question is, Is she better suited to the presidency than the Democratic alternatives?
Consider HRC's decision as senator to vote to authorize Bush Jr.'s disastrous occupation of Iraq. (She later claimed that she was just protecting Washington's negotiating position, but that dog didn't hunt.) One rationale we hear is that the White House hoodwinked everyone--except that they didn't: some people were "unbalanced" enough to call out the lies. Let's consider possible explanations for her vote.
1. She sincerely believed the administration's claims. That makes her a sucker, and the United States does not need a president who can be bamboozled.
2. She was afraid to vote against it. That makes her a coward, and the United States does not need a president who's afraid to do the right thing.
3. She calculated that it was in her political interest to go along with the White House. (To me, this seems the likeliest explanation.) That makes her a cynic, and the United States definitely does not need another Nixon.
Another apologia is along the lines of "This is old news. She regrets her mistake, and it's time to move on." But if a vote like this isn't a crucial test of an aspiring president's judgement, what is? Regretting your mistake after it's too late is always easier than avoiding it when it counts. Remember, there were several Democrats who showed better judgement than she did.
The Democratic Party's present mood reminds me of the first half of 1979. Back then quite a few Democrats were waiting for anyone to challenge Jimmy Carter's renomination. Ted Kennedy entered the race in the fall but lost to Carter, who then lost to the evil Ronald Reagan. (For what it's worth, Kennedy would probably have lost too.)
Some Democrats are still hoping that Elizabeth Warren will run, despite her repeated insistence that she won't. That brings to mind the attempt to draft Mario Cuomo into the 1992 race despite his refusal to run. Cuomo's refusal was tragic for the Democratic Party and the United States: he clearly would have defeated Bill Clinton and Bush Sr., and it's hard to imagine him being as cowardly, unimaginative and self-serving as Clinton was. But the attempted draft seemed pitiful, and so do the attempts to make Warren change her mind.
Another possibility is open socialist Bernie Sanders. He seems to have got cold feet, which is a shame. I've taken to writing "You can do it, Bernie!" in The Huffington Post and Facebook posts whenever the 2016 race is discussed. Don't let anyone tell you that Sanders is "unelectable": if any Democrat can blow it in November, it's Hillary Clinton. I remember the 2004 Democratic primary, in which liberals were first-class fools (not to mention cowards!) when they let the Washington establishment convince them that Howard Dean was too angry to be electable, and chose the far less electable John Kerry instead. If you ask me, Dean would probably have won the election by an unstealable margin and might even have taken Congress back!
Some of Sanders' supporters want him to run only as a third-party candidate, but I say it's only fair for Sanders to give the Democratic Party the chance to nominate him, before he runs against them. And don't be too sure that he can't win the nomination and even the presidency. He'll be outclassed in financial resources, but so was Obama. A lot of Democrats will vote for him just because he isn't HRC, and a whole lot of November voters will choose him just because he isn't a Republican. (As happened with Obama in 2008.) And I think people will actually vote for him, instead of just voting against his opponent. Unlike Hillary Clinton, he's the kind of Democrat who can win back Democratic control of Congress as well as the White House.
You can do it, Bernie!