Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Hair to the Chief
Conventional wisdom holds that the Democratic Party treats its losing
candidates badly. This is a debatable point, but there are a number of
examples that seem to back it up: Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry-- all thrown
on the scrap heap, all doomed to irrelevance. Same thing goes for Dems
that lose the contest for their party's nomination. Howard Dean and
Gary Hart--good guys who were made into the butt of jokes before they
could work their way back to respectability.
Now Hillary, the current presumptive non-inee (tm) seems to be doing
everything she can to diminish her stature and make a joke of her
legacy even before she drops out.
So, How can Hillary stop the hemorrhaging? How can she become a respected
party leader again once she is out of the running? Perhaps it would be
instructive to look at two leaders who have ended their races with
dignity intact for advice.
Bill Richardson and Al Gore have bowed out of their respective contests
yet remain party leaders. So, what separates the Gores of this world
from the Dukaki? The answer should be obvious. If Hillary is to
regain respectability after dropping out, she would be wise to to take
a tip from these two statesmen and allow for a nice, leisurely
"decompression period" (in Richardson's words). The Hillary that comes
back into the public eye will be rested, a little more casual, and have
that certain je ne sais quoi that we've come to embrace in our failed candidates.
Et voila!
Comments (6)
Awww... c'mon, aufzoo... you are better than this!
This is a direct steal from Bill Maher's NEW RULES on the 3/28/08 show!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoGlla3cGBY
(Time Marker: 3:00)
March 31, 2008 1:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, busted! Maybe we should give north_aufzoo the benefit of the doubt? Perhaps he just had the same idea. I think he's demonstrated his wit on previous occasions.
March 31, 2008 5:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh NO.
That is embarrassing.
I don't get HBO, so I plead ignorance, but still-- embarrassing. At least my picture was a little less (more?) creepy.
But thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt, DF. I'm-a no thief.
B'oh.
March 31, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
As soon as I saw Richardson with his post-run beard, I immediately recognized that looked more relaxed. Personally, I thought he was looking very Jimmy Smits. Distinguished, smooth, comfortable and yet stately. In fact, now he seems to have this whole new air about him like, "Hey, I could be Vice President. What the hell, right?" Anyhow, I submit to some Smits evidence for your approval:
http://www.afi.com/tvevents/laa/lucas/dinner/Smitts.jpg
March 31, 2008 1:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can we be a little more specific when speaking of doomed ex-candidates? The Dems retain little respect for those candidates who actually won the nomination and lost the GE. But there's plenty of also-rans who have run and lost in the primaries without being pre-judged as doomed in a subsequent primary run. Al Gore is a good example, having lost in '88 and then picking up the VP slot on the '92 ticket. There are some Dems who would not support another Gore run, given his loss in 2000 (all kinds of reasons to dispute that, but it does fall in line with the general rule of thumb), but it's also true that many Dems would have supported a Gore run in 2008.
When HRC loses the battle for the nomination this year there is nothing inherent in how Dems look at their primary season contenders to suggest she will be unsupported or unable to achieve the nomination should she run again (her age in 2016 notwithstanding). This idea that all previous Dem candidates are precluded from running again should be more carefully framed.
March 31, 2008 2:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
that photo of Hillary with facial hair looks a lot like Owen Wilson.
March 31, 2008 3:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment