Hillarysworld

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Hillarysworld -> Hillary 2012 -> Hillary in 2012? It's not a farfetched notion (Investigative Voice 6/27/10)
Post Info
TOPIC: Hillary in 2012? It's not a farfetched notion (Investigative Voice 6/27/10)
Jen the Michigander


SuperModerator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1788
Date:
Hillary in 2012? It's not a farfetched notion (Investigative Voice 6/27/10)
Permalink  
 

http://investigativevoice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4641:hillary-in-2012&catid=25:the-project&Itemid=44

Recent speculation discounting a run for the White House by Hillary Clinton in 2012 fails to consider the obvious: The former first lady/U.S. senator has not stopped running for president since well before Barack Obama defeated her and was himself elected.

Nor has her husband stopped campaigning tirelessly toward that end.

The junior senator from New York surprised nearly everyone when she accepted Obama's offer to become his secretary of state, a move by the new president widely considered at the time to be brilliant: He could unite his party, obtain a competent high-profile cabinet member who would support his policies, satisfy female voters, and remove his major rival from presidential consideration — all in one fell swoop.

What everyone failed to consider is that William Jefferson Clinton is the shrewdest politician in this country in recent memory; that he sees his wife's election as the missing element/fulfillment of his own presidency and as necessary to cementing his place in history — and that he has the uncanny ability to read the political future.

Conventional wisdom during the general election campaign of 2008 was that it was not in Hillary’s interests to be secretary of state. Having just been defeated by Obama, why would she want to help or join him?

Even more important, how could she hope to become president if she became a member of the Obama team? In eight years she would be too old to be a viable candidate. Wouldn’t it be better for her to remain in the Senate, where she could maintain her independence, assert and extend her leadership, and criticize the new president — if and when the time became right — from the sidelines?

The flaw in that line of thinking is that Obama could have easily thrown a monkey wrench into the scenario simply by appointing her to the first vacancy on the Supreme Court, thereby eliminating her as a rival permanently. She would have been hard-pressed to refuse the appointment — no one refuses a president’s nomination to the Supreme Court — and would thus have been removed from presidential contention for life.

Bill Clinton sees those things, with his uncanny ability to look into the political abyss that is the future. He often makes mistakes, to be sure, but he learns from them: He doesn’t make the same mistake a second time. For example, in the last campaign, he hurt his wife’s candidacy against Obama by, among other things, taking center stage.

He won’t do that again.

Newt Gingrich, the former GOP speaker of the House whom Clinton vanquished in 1996 despite being under threat of imminent impeachment — and himself a Republican presidential prospect for 2012 — has described Hillary as “one of the two most shrewd and savvy politicians” he has seen in his lifetime. “The other one,” Gingrich says, “is her husband.”

Consider therefore, that Bill Clinton foresaw the prospect of Obama’s eliminating Hillary from contention by appointing her to the high court, thus removing her from the Senate and marginalizing her political base — and also Clinton’s own place in history by preventing his wife from fulfilling his presidential legacy.

Consider in addition the prospect that Clinton, and probably also Hillary, recognized from the outset that Obama’s inexperience would ultimately bring about his failure, that his rhetorical skills would not suffice in the absence of real political acumen, that too much promise accompanied by too little delivery would quickly wear thin with the electorate — and that by 2012 the president might well be vulnerable to a serious challenge from within his own party.

Add to that the growing perception that Obama, while well-intentioned, is out of his depth as chief executive, that he just can’t handle the job; that he isn’t Harry Truman firing an immensely popular but insubordinate Douglas MacArthur, he’s merely Barack Obama firing a brilliant and successful, albeit loose-lipped, Stanley McChrystal.

However, it’s not unprecedented for incumbent presidents to be challenged for renomination, although no such challenger has been successful since the late 1800s. The closest to winning in the 20th century was Theodore Roosevelt, followed by Ronald Reagan and Edward Kennedy. In 1968 former Senator Eugene McCarthy caused incumbent President Lyndon Johnson to drop out of the renomination race.

Will Hillary run in 2012? It’s probably too soon to know. If President Obama can prevent the Democrats from losing a substantial number of seats this year in the House of Representatives and Senate, then likely no.

But if the Republicans do well in November — especially if they regain control of either house of Congress — the president will have to absorb a substantial portion of the blame, thereby further weakening his own candidacy two years hence. He already has been blamed for high-profile Democratic losses in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts this past year, where he foolishly put his personal prestige on the line in support of losing candidates.

And just last week a Rasmussen poll revealed that a majority of Americans think Hillary is more qualified to be president than the president.

A Clinton candidacy, while not a certainty by any means, is nonetheless a distinct possibility.

No one doubts she wants it. No one doubts her husband wants it.

If she runs, he can be counted on to not make the mistakes that hurt her in the last campaign. If she makes the decision to do what’s only been done three times in more than a hundred years, he can be counted on to be a major player by her side.

She can’t do it without him. But with him she can change history.

Whatever one may think of their political marriage, they are in tandem and in synch when it comes to waging political war to win elections.

And this time, she will have yet another credential to recommend her to the voters, that of secretary of state — an office held by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison when it was a steppingstone to the presidency, as well as other presidents before they became chief executive.

__________________

4145952823_2e0edce16f.jpg

Nobody puts THIS baby in the corner!
freespirit


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1695
Date:
Permalink  
 

Several excellent points in this article. It promises to be, at the least, an interesting political season - and, if we're fortunate, a successful one, as well. Hillary should have been president. Barack didn't "defeat" her, as we know. The nomination was stolen from her, and there's only one way for that wrong to be made right. The party will not be "healed" until that happens.



__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.  ~Susan B. Anthony
Sanders


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
Permalink  
 

Yes, I agree. Great points in this article and it is very true.. Hillary 2012 is indeed a real possibility increasibly likely to happen especially if the POTUS does not wish to experience a crushing loss. The DNP would be smart to nominate Hillary without the hassles of a primary.

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!
freespirit


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1695
Date:
Permalink  
 

Sanders wrote:

Yes, I agree. Great points in this article and it is very true.. Hillary 2012 is indeed a real possibility increasibly likely to happen especially if the POTUS does not wish to experience a crushing loss. The DNP would be smart to nominate Hillary without the hassles of a primary.



Agree, Sanders.  I don't think BO's ego can tolerate a crushing loss.  In the past, he's always gamed the system or had allies do it for him.  He has been certain of a win (or at least that the office would be awarded to him) each time he he has run for public office in the past.  I don't think he'll put himself into a race he can't win.  His ego is just not strong enough to endure that - IMO.



__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.  ~Susan B. Anthony
Jen the Michigander


SuperModerator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1788
Date:
Permalink  
 

Also, Obama has never had to run on his record before.

__________________

4145952823_2e0edce16f.jpg

Nobody puts THIS baby in the corner!
freespirit


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1695
Date:
Permalink  
 

Jen the Michigander wrote:

Also, Obama has never had to run on his record before.



Excellent Point.  Voting "present" a million times was apparently OK for some voters.  Now that he's had to take some action, and declare a position, he's gonna be a tougher sell.



__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.  ~Susan B. Anthony
Sanders


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
Permalink  
 

Jen the Michigander wrote:

Also, Obama has never had to run on his record before.


Excellent point.  Its gonna be interesting next year.



__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Hillarysworld -> Hillary 2012 -> Hillary in 2012? It's not a farfetched notion (Investigative Voice 6/27/10)
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard