Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Quo Vadis Hillary after 2008?
Earlier
this week, I blogged as to whether or not it was time for Hillary Clinton to
close up shop on her campaign, whether before or after the Pennsylvania
primary (assuming she doesn’t have a earth-shaking victory, if any, there).
Now, as I note, the question is what happens to her after 2008?
Per the in-depth Politico story and other items linked
there, I noted that:
• Her campaign is essentially broke, including the fact that Barack Obama could outspend her 2-1 in Pennsylvania and still have $9 million on hand to drop on North Carolina, given their current finance numbers;
• She would have to do 60-40 in the vote in remaining primaries AND 2-1 in currently unpledged or yet-unnamed superdelegates;
• The release of White House logs from her years as First Lady have put the lie to her claims to have been ardently anti-NAFTA.
So, with all that in mind, assuming she doesn’t get the nomination in 2008, what happens to Hillary Clinton’s political life, future and plans after this summer?
Speculation 1. If Obama wins in 2008, that puts her next chance of a presidential run in 2016. And, as women like Geraldine Ferraro, or plenty an older Hollywood actress, would surely, and rightly, tell us, ageism has a sexism bias to it.
In other words, a 68-year-old Hillary Clinton ain’t going to get the nomination, and not just because she will even more seem to be a link to the past and not an “agent of change” in 2016.
Speculation 2. If Obama loses, a lot of intra-Democratic navel-gazing will probably point the finger at her, and quickly. Her 2012 nomination chances might not be “none,” but they would be “slim” indeed.
And, would she stay in the Senate, under either speculation? Her seat comes up for re-election in 2012, which would bollix things up more if Obama loses in the general this year.
Or, what if Obama wins? Does Clinton get a primary challenger, backed by the Obama White House, in her 2012 Senate race?
Hence, the almost desperate quality of her recent campaigning, most recently exemplified by the Slickster questioning Obama’s patriotism.
Huffington Post has more on Bill Clinton as desperation surrogate.
For more skeptical left-liberal blogging on a variety of issues, visit SocraticGadfly.
Comments (1)
In my opinion, we have to stop falling for the narrative the Clintons want us to. We've already seen the "Hillary should quit, she's running out of money and she has no chance of winning" scenario play out.
What happens? She makes an "incredible comeback" and turns this race around.
Let's just stop setting up the perception that this is really what happened.
Yes, it's true. She can't escape the reality of the math.
Unless, of course, we unknowingly help her build another burst of "don't count me out " momentum.
I'm less concerned about Hillary's future and more concerned with making sure the candidate I support gets elected in November. It's futile to talk about her conceding the race. She's going to win Pennsylvania, and all this talk about getting her to quit just strengthens her resistance and sets up the comeback kid narrative. Whenever the press covers that she's out of money, and out of luck, her campaign re-energizes its supporters, and they raise another 50 million in a few days(or that would be what Mark Penn would lead you to believe), then she wins by a landslide in Pennsylvania and "Hillary has rocketed forward in this race..." you know the rest.
We're all familiar with the fictional narratives that the Clintons feed the media.
Let's not help them get that ball rolling.
March 22, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment