Why is Hillary still running?
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:20:27 PM PDT
Hillary Clinton cannot win the 2008 Democratic nomination. It is too far gone for her now.
The problem is not that Hillary Clinton is still in the race. She has every right to be. It is that she is running the kind of race that she is. Having failed to convince voters of the viability of her own candidacy, she is now committed to proving the unviability of his.
Hillary once said it takes a village to raise a child. Now she seems determined to destroy the village in order to save it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
Why is Hillary running?
It is not for herself, but to save Bill Clinton's legacy.
Why will she not drop out?
Because this campaign has further damaged that legacy and they are now doubling down on the table.
Bill Clinton May Be Biggest Loser of Campaign
When Clinton was running for president, Todd said, he and his fellow candidates could misspeak -- and even willfully obfuscate -- with relative impunity.
"It was like a Jedi mind trick with him," he added. "It would take a few days for the media to catch up [and] by then he had moved on."
But in 2008, Clinton’s gaffes -- calling Obama’s opposition to the Iraq war a "fairy tale," inviting charges of race-baiting by comparing Obama’s campaign to Jesse Jackson’s, reviving his wife’s Bosnia trip for another spin in the news cycle -- sparked immediate blowback that seems to have caught him by surprise.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/...
Remember when you first heard of Mr. Bill Clinton twenty years ago?
A few weeks ago most voters in the 49 states outside Arkansas had not even heard the name of Governor William Clinton. And those few political junkies who might recognize it would remember mainly one thing: his introduction of the newly nominated Michael Dukakis at the 1988 Democratic National Convention. Clinton's speech droned on through 33 minutes that seemed about five times as long; the cheers that erupted when he said "in conclusion" appeared to toll the knell of any hopes he might have had to succeed in national politics.
http://www.time.com/...
Soon there afterwards, he fashioned himself as a moderate centrist New Democrat and introduced us to the Democratic Leadership Council.
The first President Bush had record high popularity because of the 1991 Gulf War and this scared away many Democrats. They thought that at the time that Bush was a shoe-in for re-election and they would be better suited to wait until 1996 and run against the woefully lacking Vice President Dan Quayle.
This included New York Governor Mario Cuomo who was the heavyweight challenger-in-waiting.
The Democratic nomination field was left to weaker second stringers who were dubbed by the media as the Seven Dwarfs. In fact, the only real challengers to Clinton were Massachusetts Senator Paul Tsongas (Dukakis redux) and former California Governor Jerry Brown who ran a proto-Internet grassroots campaign using a national toll-free 800 number but was deemed to far-left for the center-right nation that elected Ronald Reagen twice by wide margins a few years earlier.
So, the nomination was easy pickings for the "southern JFK" with little experience but great charisma and an African American support base.
Bush's fortunes turned sour in 1992 due to an economic recession that embittered voters and the entrance of a crazy Texan billionaire named H. Ross Perot with libertarian to conservative views.
Bill Clinton was able to win the presidency with only 43% of the vote while Perot pulled away 19% that would have mostly gone to Bush.
To their credit, Bill and Hillary immediately attacked the health care issue but did it in such a clumsy way that they alienated the public and gave rise to right wing talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and allowed Newt Gingrich to lead the Republicans in taking over control of both the House and the Senate for the first time in 40 years in 1994 and creating the age of divisive hyper-partisanship that we see today.
Worst of all, George W. Bush is elected Governor of Texas in that wave.
Come 1996, Clinton had regained lost footing by putting health care and Hillary on the backbench while the Republicans put up an old war hero that lost a past nomination to a Bush. The old codger was Bob Dole that ran an impotent campaign.
All hell broke lose in the second term with Monica Lewinsky and the Impeachment in 1998.
The resonance of that episode had a clear effect on the electorate in 2000 and allowed Texas Governor George W. Bush (Restoration of the House of Bush) to capture the White House and the rest is history.
In the aftermath of the Clinton presidency, the Democratic Party lost the White House, the Congress, the majority of the State House, state legislatures and was cast out into the political wilderness. With unchecked Republican power we have seen the unraveling of America.
What was worse is what President Bill Clinton actually did do with those eight precious years in the White House? Ultimately there were no health care initiatives. There were no campaign finance reforms or voting rights initiatives that would have prevented the 2000 fiasco. There were no landmark programs or anything of a legacy except a bubble economy and a Republican majority.
What did he accomplish?
Defense of Marriage Act, allowing states to refuse recognition of certain same-sex marriages, and defined marriage as between a male and female for purposes of federal law.
Telecom Reform Act, eliminating major ownership restrictions for radio and television groups.
Iraq Liberation Act, stating of policy of regime change in Iraq.
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, promising to "end welfare as we know it" but tinged with misogyny and racism (welfare queen) in its promotion.
"Don't ask, don't tell", a policy of discriminating against homosexuals in the military.
North American Free Trade Agreement, n'uff said.
China Most Favored Nation Trade Agreement, again n'uff said.
And so much more but in line more with the right than the left.
It was Bill Clinton's "centrists" policies that gave legitimacy to Ralph Nader's run in 2000.
Given the history that we have had with Bill Clinton, why would we even consider the Restoration the House of Clinton? For that is what it is. If you had to sum to the Clinton Presidency into one word, it would be "Monica" and Bill and Hillary know that.
So, to set history straight, they set to recapture the White House and they have since the closing days of Bill's stay.
The Clintons were never the super surrogates for either Al Gore or John Kerry in 2000 and 2004 and I do not expect them to be for Barack Obama in 2008, because they are planning again in 2012.
That is why Hillary is still running.
Permalink | 59 comments