Hillary Clinton Can't Be Elected
This article is why nobody gets their information from MSN. Read through all of it; I forced myself to.
Basically, the majority of the article consists of the author serving as a partisan apologist for Senator Clinton, and explaining why the claims of the "right wing attack machine" are baseless. I think he's wrong; I think that Bill Clinton is a liability to his wife, I think that her many scandals will come back to hurt her, I don't think anyone can truly say that she's a moderate, et cetera. However, the author does make a point, all the way at the end, that I can agree with.
Now, I obviously don't believe that the American electorate is as divided as the author claims, and I say, with some trepidation, but with a lot of confidence, that I don't think Hillary Clinton can win. However, I agree with the basic point he's making: Hillary Clinton isn't likeable, at all. Hoighty toighty New Yorkers may be able to identify with her, at least enough to get her elected there. Can you really see Joe Six Pack, or Jane Soccer Mom, accepting her when she tries to claim that she's one of the people? Of course not. Senator Clinton displays absolutely no personality traits that anyone identifies with a major national leader (read: president). People don't see her as a model parent, just a model politician.
If 2000 and 2004 taught us anything, it was that America doesn't want ivory tower liberals, and Hillary Clinton is an ivory tower liberal. She makes a decent effort to portray herself as something other than a Ted Kennedy or a John Kerry. However, as the author says, that's not enough, and ultimately, the problem isn't fixable.
You can quote me on this, and in the unlikely event that I'm still blogging in 2008, you can call me on it if I'm wrong. I think that if Hillary Clinton runs in the Democratic primaries in 2008, she won't get the nomination; I think she'll wind up like Howard Dean. The author claims that Senator Clinton could energize both the Democratic base and centrists, but let's be honest, only the ultra-libs have any interest in her. Moderates just plain aren't interested in her, and they're going to see right through her, just like they saw right through John Kerry's "war hero" image and his infamous "plan".
Unfortunately, I can't with good conscience post that link and ask you to read it without warning you of the enfuriating money shot:
Hear me now and believe me later, if anyone has the testicular fortitude during a conversation with me to compare Ronald Reagan, one of America's greatest patriots, and the savior of our country after Vietnam and Jimmy Carter, to Hillary Clinton, a canniving, two-faced, Machiavellian opportunist, they are asking for a severe beating.
More tomorrow. G'night, folks.
Basically, the majority of the article consists of the author serving as a partisan apologist for Senator Clinton, and explaining why the claims of the "right wing attack machine" are baseless. I think he's wrong; I think that Bill Clinton is a liability to his wife, I think that her many scandals will come back to hurt her, I don't think anyone can truly say that she's a moderate, et cetera. However, the author does make a point, all the way at the end, that I can agree with.
Yet Hillary does face a genuine electability issue, one that has little to do with ideology, woman-hating, or her choice of life partner. Plainly put, it's her personality. In her four years in the Senate, Hillary has proven herself to be capable, diligent, formidable, effective, and shrewd. She can make Republican colleagues sound like star-struck teenagers. But she still lacks a key quality that a politician can't achieve through hard work: likability. As hard as she tries, Hillary has little facility for connecting with ordinary folk, for making them feel that she understands, identifies, and is at some level one of them. You may admire and respect her. But it's hard not to find Hillary a bit inhuman. Whatever she may be like in private, her public persona is calculating, clenched, relentless—and a little robotic.
With the American electorate so closely divided, it would be foolish to say that Hillary, or any other potential nominee, couldn't win. And a case can be made that the first woman who gets elected president will need to, as Hillary does, radiate more toughness than warmth. But in American elections, affection matters. Democrats lost in 2000 and 2004 with candidates Main Street regarded as elitist and aloof, to a candidate voters related to personally. Hillary isn't as obnoxious as Gore or as off-putting as Kerry. But she's got the same damn problem, and it can't be fixed.
Now, I obviously don't believe that the American electorate is as divided as the author claims, and I say, with some trepidation, but with a lot of confidence, that I don't think Hillary Clinton can win. However, I agree with the basic point he's making: Hillary Clinton isn't likeable, at all. Hoighty toighty New Yorkers may be able to identify with her, at least enough to get her elected there. Can you really see Joe Six Pack, or Jane Soccer Mom, accepting her when she tries to claim that she's one of the people? Of course not. Senator Clinton displays absolutely no personality traits that anyone identifies with a major national leader (read: president). People don't see her as a model parent, just a model politician.
If 2000 and 2004 taught us anything, it was that America doesn't want ivory tower liberals, and Hillary Clinton is an ivory tower liberal. She makes a decent effort to portray herself as something other than a Ted Kennedy or a John Kerry. However, as the author says, that's not enough, and ultimately, the problem isn't fixable.
You can quote me on this, and in the unlikely event that I'm still blogging in 2008, you can call me on it if I'm wrong. I think that if Hillary Clinton runs in the Democratic primaries in 2008, she won't get the nomination; I think she'll wind up like Howard Dean. The author claims that Senator Clinton could energize both the Democratic base and centrists, but let's be honest, only the ultra-libs have any interest in her. Moderates just plain aren't interested in her, and they're going to see right through her, just like they saw right through John Kerry's "war hero" image and his infamous "plan".
Unfortunately, I can't with good conscience post that link and ask you to read it without warning you of the enfuriating money shot:
But a disciplined centrist who can unify her side while leading her own base into furious battle—the way Ronald Reagan did—may be just the kind of polarizer who can win.
Hear me now and believe me later, if anyone has the testicular fortitude during a conversation with me to compare Ronald Reagan, one of America's greatest patriots, and the savior of our country after Vietnam and Jimmy Carter, to Hillary Clinton, a canniving, two-faced, Machiavellian opportunist, they are asking for a severe beating.
More tomorrow. G'night, folks.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home