Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Why Hillary Is Running
Clue sticks are in short supply, so I fixed me up a few with this short crib sheet.
Why is Hillary still running?
1) Because Obama hasn't beaten her yet. Yep, that's right. There's a little known clause in the Democratic rule book that says you have to get a certain number of delegates and superdelegates to win, even if all the TV and newspaper columnists and your opponent's fans have declared it over. I know, it's not exactly sensible - who'd want to buck Chris Matthews after all, but that's the way it goes. And it goes against American tradition and all our sports and movies, because it's very strange for someone to fight against overwhelming odds. Why would she do a thing like that?
2) There are still primaries left. Yes, that's right. This confuses a lot of people since we were told that this was all over by February 5 or with Wisconsin or something, but the problem is the DLC went and scheduled primaries into June, and like if no one shows up, they've gone and wasted a lot of money for nothing - they might just as well have held a caucus or embezzled more money than usual, and that just makes them downright grouchy. We don't want that.
3) 17 million voters. Or just shy of. Yep, somehow Hillary thinks she owes them something - you know, for standing up and moving to their polling place, like that's a lot of work. And they kind of want to be counted, even if for futile narcissism. Because there's this rumor going around that her opponent really smoked her by getting... just shy of 17 million votes. Yeah, it was a real blowout, but her fans are asking for a roll call anyway. Spoil sports.
4) The VP slot. Yes, I know - we've heard it from Jeanne Kirkpatrick and the Psychic Connection themselves that Hillary will never take the VP slot. But the problem is that Hillary doesn't seem to know this. Not that anyone's been brave enough to ask her (you know her reputation). But it seems that there's some peculiar reason, Hillary may just possibly believe that the VP position is worth it, maybe access to the President, coming up with policy initiatives on the sly, or otherwise using the position to stir things up in Washington. I know it's been reputed to "not be worth a bucket of warm spit", but then again, being a minority Senator under an opposition President for 6 years probably wasn't a bale of hay either, nor being under investigation by Ken Starr for most of her adult life. Come to think of it, the VP position might be her best chance to slink away into sweet anonymity. Remember when Dick Cheney wasn't seen for what, 2? 3 years after 9/11?
4) The Ascension. No, not the religious one, the political one. I know it's almost a foregone conclusion that Hillary's really trying to destroy Obama so she can run again in 2012 - who wouldn't? Think of all the fun being on the road for a year and a half giving the same speech!!! The fund raisers! The debates! The press scrutiny! What could go wrong? But it seems that someone may have put a bug in Hillary's ear that being VP isn't bad odds either, and if you're planning 4 years ahead, sitting comfy in the Naval Observatory and afternoons shopping for shoes might be a more straightforward path. How good of odds? Historically, better than 1 out of 5. Not too shabby. (Okay, that's per President - the odds are a bit worse if you tally it by the larger number of Vice Presidents, such as poor Spiro Agnew who sadly came oh so close only to see it slip away). Even if Obama loses in November she could still run in 2012, and while it's certainly inevitable she'll be President at some point, after this primary season she may be thinking 20% isn't a bad hedge bet after all. And I think we all know she's always been good at options trading.
So there you have it. Feel free to add your own reasons, and be sure to click the Recommend link - we come from the obligation wing of the party.













Comments (21)
Actually, she and Obama have both been asked multiple times about the VP slot. In fact, she was asked just last night. She gave her usual response—such talk is premature. (This is also Obama's usual response, of course.)
May 15, 2008 9:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I meant close acquaintances out of the limelight of the press, say deep in a tunnel under earth with dank smell and only the clank of ankle irons to be heard, probably with Sean Connery starring.
May 15, 2008 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I sent myself on the deep open sea
with only a boat and that small troop of men,
my friends, who never had abandoned me.
26:100
May 15, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm curious about "the obligation wing of the party." I feel that I'm missing an inside joke, and I *hate* missing inside jokes.
May 15, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
We don't owe you an explanation. In fact you owe us.
May 15, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was like uh humor, in the shape of "what's the difference between ignorance and apathy? I don't know and I don't care"
May 15, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
#1, #1, #1.
May 15, 2008 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
The concern has never been about why she hasn't yet dropped out, but rather, about her negative and divisive campaign tactics.
HRC demonstrates what it looks like when a candidate is more concerned about their personal ambition than about the well being of the nation.
May 15, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, like all presidential candidates, she is ambitious. That is a trait highly valued in American culture. I was leaning Edwards but think he gave up too quickly. But she may also be running because she wants to see a Dem in the WH and believes Obama (as it stands now) will have problems. On #2, what if FLA and MI had scheduled a do-over at the end of May? I wonder if the press would ignore it as meaningless (since she's already lost) like they have WV.
May 15, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
"But she may also be running because she wants to see a Dem in the WH and believes Obama (as it stands now) will have problems."
That is my point. It doesnt matter what SHE believes. SHE doesn't get to decide whose best to run against McCain. Voters do, and the voters will soon have all spoken. She should continue to compete for votes in the remaining primaries and after that whomever has the least votes should immediately concede.
What she doesn't get to do is then wage some sort of party destroying convention fight justified by substituting her judgment of who is best for that of the voters.
May 15, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't really replying to your post, new10, though that first line looks like it. But, if you think the voters should decide, I'm with you. The Party and press seem to be deciding right now. Let's tally the popular vote in June and declare a winner.
May 15, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC continues because she cannot accept the fact that she has lost and is big part of the problem.
May 15, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe this is a glitch in the TPM software, but the last three words of your headline didn't make it: "Off the Cliff".
May 15, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
For the record, if there's confusion about the primaries ending on Super Tuesday, it was at least in part perpetuated by Senator Clinton herself, who declared it would be over by then.
Also for the record: she should stay in. What the hell is the point in getting out now? We've come this far and it's been a pretty great ride. There's only 5 contests left. 19 days. I mean, considering we've all been at this for over a year, 19 days is a drop in the bucket at this point.
And finally: Once I wrapped my head around the idea of Senator Clinton as VP, I got really excited about it. So much so, that I'd be disappointed at this point if it didn't come to be. What I'm not sure about is how Clinton supporters would feel about that. Your thoughts, Des?
May 15, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Better than nothing.
May 15, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
You think most Clinton supporters feel that way? I honestly have no idea.
May 15, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
certainly not inevitable
May 15, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
The VP pick I am begining to get excited about is Edwards. He is still young enough to run in eight years and his campaign was complimentary to Obama's.
May 15, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone made the point last night that he's too nice - not enough of an attack dog. I kind of agree with that.
May 15, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are talking about Edwards of 2004. Just like the people who are realy scared of McCain are talking about McCain 1999. Did you see the way he went after Hillary in the debates?
May 15, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's my belief that Hillary Clinton will never be President. Barring an unforeseeable catastrophe, she's not going to get the nomination this year. That window is inexorably closing. And should her "kneecapping" ("...as far as I know.", "Shame on you...", "3 AM...", "Commander-in-Chief threshold...", "hard-working Americans, white Americans...") play out to Obama's losing in November, the chances that the Democratic Party will forgive and forget in 2012 are unmeasurably small. Her divisive tactics and pandering have essentially guaranteed that this is her last "star turn", and while she's determined to milk it for every last drop of attention, the curtain will come down and there will be no encore.
And while it's still too soon to call out "Get the hook!", the audience is getting a little fidgety, wouldn't you say?
May 15, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment