Charter Member of the Sub-Media

November 04, 2004

Hillary! In 2008 « Politics As Usual »

I can't remember if I've said it here before or not, but I'm not worried about Hillary Clinton running for President in 2008 or ever.

First, the character of the nation has changed quite a bit. I think it may be possible for a strong candidate to take her seat in the Senate, frankly. But US citizens won't automatically vote her to the Presidency based on the 90s administration anymore.

Second, I think being a Senator has changed her quite a bit. She's done a fairly good job there, to tell the truth, abstaining from many opportunities to try to grab the limelight. Heck, at least she shows up for Senate votes. She's a complete Democrat Partisan, but I have no problem with that, it's her job to be that way.

Third, the only real experience she can point to is her Senate experience, and we've already discussed and seen that the candidate with executive experience is always the stronger candidate.

Fourth, the mainstream media has been damaged from their behavior in this last election, and bloggers (and the internet in general) are becoming an important source of news, commentary, and authentication/verification for people seeking knowledge about the world and events. If the legacy media continues to shill so much for the Democrat candidate, they will lose even more credibility (see above, re: the character of the nation has changed); but if they want to retain and/or improve their credibility, they will have to start being more balanced in their coverage of election campaigns. Either way, the free pass for Democrats is probably over, and without that edge, I don't think she can get elected.

I don't consider her the Anti-Christ. She's just another Democrat Senator now, and I think Condi Rice, Jeb Bush, or Rudy Giuliani would all make stronger candidates who could trounce her easily.

But it does depend on how the next 3-4 years go.

Posted by Nathan at 06:15 AM | Comments (4)
» The LLama Butchers links with: The last east coast blogger left standing
» The LLama Butchers links with: Tongue-Swallowers Watch

While I don't necessarily agree with all of your conclusions in this piece, you raise some good points, and in a reasonably non-judgemental way.

It's fairly clear that the democratic party needs to change. It is no longer the "party of middle-class America." What it will ultimately become, has yet to be seen, but clearly extreme "progressive" views won't get you elected in the bulk of the nation anymore. Part of what got Bush a second term was a combination of focus on "core values" blended with reasonably generic leanings to the center (loose standards on illegal immigration and at least verbal support of issues such as assault weapons bans and homosexual civil unions). Perhaps the Democrats' answers lie more towards the center as well.

But I suppose once you've leaned far enough one way or the other, you really have to question whether there are even two parties anymore. Can you say Zel Miller or John McCain? I'm not a big Michael Savage fan, but his analysis that we have "Republicrats" and "Democans" elected in our country is probably an apt one.

It'll be an interesting four years, to be sure.

Posted by: Morgan at November 4, 2004 06:50 AM

This comment could as easily have gone under my "New Manifest Destiny" post. :)

The thing is, I don't think Bush was really doing much "leaning" or "triangulating". I think that President Bush has merely followed his heart and the best advice of good advisors to bring about the approximate results he thought was good for the country. Karl Rove's job is to highlight the good results, minimize the bad results, and put the best overall spin onto the President's decisions. But really, despite what Rove's ideological opponents say, not to tell Bush to cold-bloodedly adopt positions to get votes/support.

Perhaps the worst thing that could have happened to the Democrat Party was Bill Clinton's election and re-election, because it seems to have convinced most Democrats that style is more important than substance.

Posted by: Nathan at November 4, 2004 07:26 AM

Oh, if everyone agreed with all of my conclusions, one of us is doing it wrong... [grin]

Posted by: Nathan at November 4, 2004 07:30 AM

I think Rudy Giuliani has too many skeletons. He was NOT a well-liked man until 9/11. The question is whether his leadership skills are enough to counter his past.

For those who consider "morality" a top issue, I think they'd have a rough time voting to a man who showed up to public events with his girlfriend...while still legally married.

Posted by: Jo at November 4, 2004 11:45 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?