Hillary for President!

Because you don’t have a choice!

So tonight it became clear that if the Democratic nominating process is going to take place in a manner that is at all democratic, Barack Obama will be the party’s nominee. It is now Hillary Clinton’s responsibility to drop out of the race. But you didn’t need me to tell you that. Just read the Washington Post or Slate’s Hillary Deathwatch.

But here is where I can offer my own crackpot conspiracy theory: I sincerely believe that if Hillary Clinton does not drop out of the race this week, she is intentionally trying to make it impossible for Obama to beat John McCain in November. She believes that this will ensure her the nomination in 2012, when she believes that she can finally win.

This quote from the Washington Post justifies my point:

A Clinton adviser said the situation was increasingly becoming one in which “she cannot be nominated and he can’t get elected.”

So the obvious solution is to destroy your own party’s candidate and subject the United States and the world to four years of John McCain so that YOU can be in the White House.

Or am I going totally out of my mind?

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under American Politics

5 responses to “Hillary for President!

  1. penny

    I’m not sure. I think she has positioned herself a little too close to McCain on important issues like foreign policy to be perceived as significantly different from him in 2012. Also, if McCain becomes president, it will probably be another 4 years of dysfunctional federal government, and people will be even more eager for “change.” Hillary is not really convincing as an agent of change, despite her campaign’s insistence that she has been a change-maker for years.

    If she doesn’t get the Democratic nomination and/or win the presidency, there is talk that she will run for Governor of New York.
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/129399

  2. Claude

    Max says: “So tonight it became clear that if the Democratic nominating process is going to take place in a manner that is at all democratic, Barack Obama will be the party’s nominee.”

    If the nomination were decided by the pledged delegates alone, and if you forget about the superdelegates, then your comment makes sense. But YOUR Democratic party came up with the idea of superdelegates, so you gotta live with that.

    If the superdelegates give the nod to Clinton, it might appear to be undemocratic, but the whole reason for having superdelegates in the first place is to potentially usurp the will of the people.

    Save your ire for them – Clinton is simply taking advantage of the rules of a flawed system which she, and Obama, agreed to abide by.

  3. Max

    PENNY:
    While Hillary has gotten a little cowboy lately, I still think that in four years (or five months) it will be easy for her to look pretty different from McCain. I wish she had just settled for Governor of New York two years ago. That would have worked out much better.

    But I’ve come to expect–maybe unfairly–very little from Hillary Clinton other than aggressiveness and ambition.

    CLAUDE:
    You’re right about the superdelegates that MY party came up with. But I don’t have to be happy about them, the same way I don’t have to be happy about the ELECTORAL COLLEGE. I look forward to a sweeping movement of electoral reform in America.

  4. penny

    Yeah but if she keeps changing her positions that could put her at a disadvantage.

    Either way, I wish she would give up now. Two months ago I would have said that she is unfairly portrayed by the media, there is no reason to think that she would be significantly different from Obama as president, and her perseverance just shows how much she really cares. But now she is being selfish.

    Maybe if the Democratic party loses in the general election because of this never-ending primary, Jacob Weisberg will write “The Clinton Tragedy,” a psychoanalytic book about how Hillary’s relationship with Bill (and her father?) were the cause of her downfall.

  5. MDH

    I haven’t checked the blog in a while, but despite the delay I think I should weigh in on this. To make my response relavent I should respond how I would’ve on May 7th:

    I have been an ardent supporter of Hillary from the beginning (even when she was the first lady). Like most Democrats I certainly believe that Obama would make a great president, though he lacks Clinton’s experience in politics. That said, I would prefer the nomination to go to Hillary. As far as the speculation that she will continue to fight for the nomination until the convention in August and the bad press she’s getting for her determination, is it really fair for us to argue that Clinton should drop out of the race. True, it would be better for the party, but isn’t a career in politics just like any other cut throat profession? If Clinton was battling for the presidency of a major pharmaceutical company against Obama I think it would be totally unreasonable for her colleges to expect that she give up for the good of the company. Sure, both candidates want what’s best for the country, but don’t they both believe that their future presidency is the right thing for the United States? Isn’t that why they’re running for president in the first place? So as far as your theory Max, I think you’re right that there is a slight change that Hillary’s decision to stay in the race may cost the democrats a place in the White House in 2008, but I don’t think she is directly sabotaging the party. Yes, she maybe vying for the nomination in 2012 (why wouldn’t she?), but in the long run she believes that she is the best candidate for this year AND in four years. So can we really blame her for determination? I hope you’re not right about John McCain taking the presidency, but I think the same criticism that Democratic Party is ascribing to Clinton could be said of Obama. Sure, he’s got the leg up now, but considering how close they’ve been at some points during the race, plus the fact that Hillary could win the popular vote and that Obama can’t win with a certain type of voter, I think it’s safe to say that even states like North Carolina would rather vote for Clinton than McCain—or am I totally going out of my mind?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s