President H. R. Clinton? Not Likely

Many people of faith would have their doubts about Hillary's calling, especially when looking at her voting record...

Such as what votes exactly?

Posted by Steve M. at March 16, 2005 8:47 AM

Good point. I'll rescind that.

Posted by Gerard Van Der Leun at March 16, 2005 8:56 AM

I agree with the Humiliation Factor being of some import ... but
at the risk of being offensive, I'll quote my 80 yo Mother re Sen
Clinton, 'She's a c--t and will NEVER be President'. I'll call that the
C factor. I think it is more determinent than anything else.

Posted by Steel Turman at March 16, 2005 10:14 AM

Kristof wants Democrats to lie?

This is news? That's what the 2004 Democratic Convention was all about, one big "Trojan Horse" lie.

Posted by Roderick Reilly at March 16, 2005 10:44 AM
Nobody gets elected President because "Hey, its my turn."

No, but parties do. Republican fatigue affected the '92 election and it will certainly affect the next one. Also consider:

1. There are few stars in the GOP galaxy. There's Giuliani, who will have been dormant for eight years, and there's Rice, who might have trouble getting the more retrograde elements of the party to vote for her. Beyond them, who? George Allen? Frist? They're no-names. You want to beat a star, you need commensurate star power. Ask Cruz Bustamante.

2. She's the human incarnation of every shallow liberal benchmark of progress. Think of how many prefab storylines she brings to the table: "First woman president," "intellectuals back in power," "Clintons return to the White House," etc. Her only "failing," as it were, is that she's white, but that can be remedied with an appropriate running mate. In short, the media's going to go into a fucking swoon for her. (Rice, needless to say, is the natural choice to mitigate this effect.)

3. Hillary's drift towards the center isn't as risky as it might have been had Dean not been elected DNC Chair. Once she gets the nomination, she and Howie can play a form of good cop/bad cop where she makes noises about religion and defense to attract the centrists while Dean reassures the moonbats that she's a fellow traveler at heart and won't abandon the cause. Thus is the base appeased and at least 47% of the vote locked up.

As for the Humiliation Factor, I think it's a dead issue and grows deader with each hawkish word that she utters.

Honestly, she seems to me to be almost a sure thing.

Posted by Allah at March 16, 2005 12:57 PM

Allah is disgustingly persuasive. If that happens I may have to MOVE TO CANADA! no FRANCE! er, no, that's not right.... TIERRA DEL FUEGO? Ah, the hell with it.

Posted by Gerard Van Der Leun at March 16, 2005 1:31 PM

I think that she gets the nomination for sure. I don't see any Democrats who can beat her there. If they want to win, they must de-rail her, and quickly. I don't see that happening. As for the general election, I am not sure yet. Those high negative make me wonder, but lets not forget Bush had high negatives as well.

Posted by Final Historian at March 16, 2005 1:53 PM

Australia mate, it would be time to move to Australia. We could always go to the pub with Tim Blair...

Posted by Final Historian at March 16, 2005 1:55 PM

C'mon Allah, Rice as Vice teamed with Ridge, or Jeb or Perry or Owen would kick her butt. You're not factoring in the shift in party identification either. That's a pretty solid 5% move that the Reps have never had before. If they can beat the Dem's while trailing by 5 why should they lose when they've pulled even? Hellary would energize the Rep "over my dead body" vote better than Kerry did. It doesn't mean a damn thing for her to hold the blues - although she won't do that either. Which reds do you figure she can pick up?

You don't have to move, Gerard - and Costa Rica beats Tierra del Fuego by a rather large margin if worse comes to worst.

Posted by Rick Ballard at March 16, 2005 1:58 PM
Rice as Vice teamed with Ridge, or Jeb or Perry or Owen would kick her butt.

Rick. Dude. The surest way to ratchet up Republican fatigue to election-losing proportions would be to nominate another Bush. As for Ridge, or Romney or Pataki for that matter: they're charisma black holes. They make Bob Dole look lifelike. They're Al Gore drained of joie de vivre. And re: Perry and Owen -- who?

I think Hillary's nomination is a fait accompli, which means Rice has to be on the ticket. It's essential. Otherwise you're going to end up with two more rich white stiffs in suits, and the contrast with the Democratic ticket will only underscore the old complaints about Republicans being exclusive and patriarchal. Not something you want to advertise when your chances at victory depend upon centrist voters, many/most of whom are hawkish but socially liberal -- which is precisely how Hillary is positioning herself right now. Add to that the fact that the war on terror is likely to be a losing issue for the GOP in '08 (either because it's failing, or stagnant, such that voters are open to a change of leadership or because it's succeeding so well that we don't need serious hawks in charge anymore) and I think we're looking at trouble.

Also, I think you're underestimating the extent to which many disgruntled liberals who crossed party lines and voted for W. last time will be looking for excuses to "come home" to the Democrats in '08. I'm not so right-wing that I'd categorically refuse to vote Democrat in an election, but if I did, I'd be searching for any signs of improvement in the GOP over the next four years to justify a return to the fold. Hillary gives them that justification. I don't believe for a minute that she's really all that hawkish (or, at least, as hawkish as a Republican would be), and I doubt that any disaffected libs believe so either. But the mere pretext, the mere effort on her part to appear that way and thereby indicate that the Democrats have moved away from their Michael-Moore-ish tendencies at even a superficial level, might be sufficient to draw them back to where they feel they naturally belong.

Posted by Allah at March 16, 2005 3:34 PM

Allah,

Which red states would go blue for Hilary? Romney and Pataki weren't on my list and the guys who are match Hilary's "charisma" quite well. At least they don't start with a dirty laundry list as long as my arm.

I agree about the Dem crossovers but they were not material in the key states in '04. As far as I can tell the Reps out registered the Dems in new voters by about 3 million. Those aren't crossovers.

We don't even know what the defining issues will be in '08 so it's very hard to say who will make the best Rep candidate. If Hilary takes the nomination it won't make much difference - if Rice is on the ticket.

Posted by Rick Ballard at March 16, 2005 4:29 PM

Hillary has a core group of supporters. That group will never grow. Hillary is a never will be.

Posted by mark butterworth at March 16, 2005 8:02 PM

well, we could always change the constitution to allow Awnold on the ballet.

Posted by Justin Moser at March 17, 2005 1:00 AM

everyone should remember that this is the wife of a turncoat president who apoligised to japan because we used the atomic bomb to the end the war with them and saved a tremendous amount of american lives. now she is promising to help our vets and i for one have great doubt that she means any part of what she spouting.

Posted by yoyo at December 23, 2007 5:11 PM