“We’ve tried the untested candidate before,” is how one longtime consultant put it. “Could we not do that again?” – No Kleenex in Tinseltown [Politico magazine]
OH, WOE is me blues over Hillary Clinton‘s potential 2016 candidacy is making for widespread click bait heaven amid the media trying to follow the most emotionally wrought tantrum seen in Democratic Party politics since… well… the last time Hillary Clinton decided to run for president.
The “I’m not a big Hillary fan, but we’re stuck with her” line is so tragic, really. Poor Democrats, stuck with Hillary Clinton, former New York senator, First Lady, and Secretary of State, what can she possibly bring against Jeb Bush, Rand Paul or Chris Christie?
But seriously, is anything more depressing than imagining a Hillary versus Jeb contest? It just might be the last thing disgruntled voters can stand before the entire system explodes. That wouldn’t be a bad thing, no matter where you sit, although it would actually diminish the importance of what the first viable woman president would actually mean.
Still, there are so many stories, so little attention span for the psychological trauma being experienced by political activists across the Democratic spectrum, all of it being dumped into the public sphere so everyone can weigh in and judge the righteousness of each faction’s commitment to making Hillary the problem.
There’s so much buyer’s remorse over Barack Obama’s presidency at this point that it’s impossible to weigh just how much Hillary’s potential candidacy means by itself.
Standing on the outside looking in at all this establishment angst, whether Democratic or progressive elite, as a former 90210 resident, I prefer the blunt objectivity of Hollywood to the circular soundbite war from the collective money grubbers, all of whom are just as bad as the Wall Street ilk that has become the whipping bitch of the activist class.
Everyone’s trying to buy the nomination, including progressives, so where’s the high bar? You’d think after the 2014 midterms Democrats would be focused on states, but let’s face it, sucking up to donors pays people’s salaries, no matter where you are in the food chain.
By any estimate, residents of Zip Code 90210 and environs gave or raised millions of dollars to Democratic candidates in the last midterm electoral cycle, with entertainment figures like DreamWorks Animation’s c.e.o. Jeffrey Katzenberg leading the way. Katzenberg beat the bushes for Democratic candidates across the country, making a particular push for the failed Kentucky Senate campaign of Alison Lundergan Grimes—calling prospective donors early on a Sunday morning, one of them recalled, to make sure they had maxed out in giving to her campaign.
[…] Or as another longtime California Democratic activist now serving in the Obama administration said, “From what I can tell, most people are licking their wounds by getting ready for Hillary.”
Au contraire, mon ami.
Democracy Alliance is having a winter meeting that features Senator Elizabeth Warren who is speaking tonight and will no doubt bring the house down. Who doesn’t root for Warren, especially if Senator Harry Reid can actually craft a position in the Senate leadership for her, which has been in the works [and now has happened]. Vice President Joe Biden is also invited, but not Hillary Clinton. People are outraged about Clinton’s exclusion.
I’m just not sure why anyone should care.
If you haven’t been paying attention, then perhaps you’re surprised that Hillary won’t be addressing progressives at a donor function, but anyone not sidetracked by Kim Kardashian‘s butt breaking the internet campaign isn’t moved one way or the other. It’s a distraction, highlighted in the pre-2016 angst of outsiders taking their moment to be relevant before the system swamps them.
The reality is set in stone.
“It’s easy to gripe about Hillary. It’s a lot harder to find a solution.” – David Corn quoted in “The liberal media’s not ready for Hillary” [Politico]
If David Corn is saying this it might be time for progressives to start planning group therapy sessions.
The case against Hillary Clinton from Democratic activist groups seems to stem from the disappointment that Barack Obama didn’t turn out to be The One, so they better ward against it happening again. God help the Democratic Party if they acquiesce to the same people who never understood President Obama was simply a politician who promised something he couldn’t deliver, because he never respected the system he was elected to govern.
Huff and puff and blow the Democrats left, with all your might.
But as I’ve been writing for years now, you can’t change the system if you can’t work it. At least not yet and you certainly can’t do it from the outside, which is why the tea party never broke away from Republicans, and Democratic progressives never will either.
What Hillary Clinton represents to practical political, liberal minds like mine is someone who’s watched the system going back to Nixon’s impeachment, then as First Lady; been inside the system, both in the Senate and at State; and who has a chance of working the system, because she also knows the machinations and men (and very few women) who run it from Wall Street.
The worst thing that can happen to Democrats is a Hillary versus Jeb contest. But then again, it could also crack the system wide open, because of the message it would send that people have been stewing about for a while now.
Everyone’s in their bubble now, tending to their own special interests, amassing money, myopia winning over vision and future, though you’ll never get the righteous to admit it, no matter what political party you prefer.
It boils down to winning.
What else is there?