The Warrior Queen is on the political war path.
Hillary isn't channeling Eleanor Roosevelt any longer. It's Margaret Thatcher
all the way. \”Warrior Queen\” here we come. That's how Andrew Sullivan
described her last week on the \”Chris Matthews Show,\” saying it may
be the way to victory for Hillary. It's a cinch that Americans aren't ever going
to elect a female dove for commander in chief, not in our lifetime, at least.
This is my take on it.
Since Senator Hillary Clinton got booed
at Take Back America for her position on Iraq, she's done some serious reevaluation. She had to. The boos
threw her and her team for a loop. In fact, it was the \”inevitability\”
tipping point. Now all bets are off.
I was there. I saw her face. It was obvious. If her jaw had been clamped any
tighter she would have crushed her teeth.
The next thing that surprised her was Senator John Kerry's incoming across her
bow, on the same day, the same stage, not too long after she was turned away. Now she's
firing back and so are others in her name.
The first thing she did was sign on to Levin-Reed in favor of a way of withdrawing
from Iraq. She'd not gone near that reality until she was booed. Did she get
the message that was delivered in D.C., but that is representative of most of the Democratic
Party? Your call. Levin-Reed was her only choice, because she simply would
never sign on to Kerry-Feingold. You see, it doesn't matter all the things Hillary
gets right, all the issues she triumphs. Because if in the middle of a presidential
campaign a military crisis occurs, the person leading Democrats simply must
be equal to kicking ass.
Next she hired Peter Daou, one of the most respected message handlers on the
web. He's working on her 2006 Senate race, but it can hardly hurt
going beyond that date. Peter has introduced me into a fascinating project,
which you'll know about soon enough. Anyone who reads the blogs knows who he
is and what he has to offer. Hillary was no dummy to hire him. She needs him.
It's also a reach out to the most powerful community on the web, the progressive
blogs. But will we listen?
A question to consider: What will happen if Hillary gains power and becomes
the nominee without the biggest progressive blogs? (Is that even possible?) I wonder if anyone is thinking
about that one. Many discount her, but I simply do not.
The other thing to consider: Post being booed, Hillary became vulnerable in
a serious way she wasn't before. Now it's all out offense because she's lost
her inevitability. She's now showing significant movement in our direction, which is representative of mainstream America: we all want out of Iraq.
There is also blood in the water. The reality is that Senator Clinton could be headed for a very big fall if something isn't done.
So, in today's Post, two of Hillary's biggest fans, besides hubby Bill, one
of whom is actually working as a consultant to her, though it's not disclosed
in the editorial, has come out swinging on her behalf.
We've heard all this \”Hillary can't win stuff\” before. In fact,
the quotes above aren't from recent weeks but from six years ago, when many
pundits — and Democrats — said there was no way that Hillary could get elected
to the Senate. She won by 12 percentage points.
We don't know if Hillary is going to run for president, but as advisers who
have worked on the only two successful Democratic presidential campaigns in
the past couple of decades, we know that if she does run, she can win that
Why? First, because strength matters. Our problems as a party are less ideological
than anatomical: Our candidates have been made to look like they have no backbone.
But the latest Post-ABC News poll shows that 68 percent of Americans describe
Hillary Clinton as a strong leader. That comes after years of her being in
the national crossfire. People know that Hillary has strong convictions, even
if they don't always agree with her. They also know that she's tough enough
to handle the viciousness of a national campaign and the challenges of the
Hillary's candidacy has the potential to reshape the electoral map for Democrats.
Others argue they can add to John Kerry's 20 states and 252 electoral votes
by adding Southern states, or Western or Midwestern, depending on their background.
Hillary has the potential to mobilize people in every region of the country.
Certainly she could win the states John Kerry did. But with the pathbreaking
possibility of this country's first female president, we could see an explosion
of women voting — and voting Democratic. States that were close in the past,
from Arkansas to Colorado to Florida to Ohio, could well move to the Democratic
column. It takes only one more state to win. …
I've been studying Hillary Clinton for a very long time, reading most the books
about her, from her own autobiography to the late Barbara
Olson's to Gail
Sheehy's and beyond. As an aside, Sheehy was in the audience at TBA to hear
Hillary's speech and the subsequent furor over it.
I'm one of the few people out here who believes Hillary can indeed win. As
for her power, nobody needs to be convinced of that reality.
But for the very first time she's no longer the one to beat, though she never was
out here in the blogosphere. Her position on Iraq has been untenable for many,
including myself, but her recent moves signal she's getting the message. She
still has a big problem, however, which Pachacutec outlined when some of Hillary's
own constituents tried to see their Senator. It
didn't go very well.
All the known Democratic names have challenges right now, starting with John
Kerry, though even Jon Stewart has covered Kerry's new line of straight talk. \”Lie and die\” was a hit for Stewart as it was for many others. Kerry is not the same man that he was in 2004. Don't write him off.
KERRY: \”Stay the course\” is not a plan. And what this administration wants is to have a fake debate, as usual. Uh, they're–you hear the drumbeat on every television show from every commentator, \”cut and run, cut and run, cut and run, cut and run.\” That's their phrase. They've found their three words, they love to do that, and they're gonna try to make the elections in November a choice between \”cut and run\” or \”stay the course.\” That's not the choice. My plan is not \”cut and run.\” Their plan is \”lie and die.\”
Few believe Russ Feingold can take it all
the way, regardless of his righteousness. Others are waiting to see if Al Gore jumps in. John Edwards is looking
good. Others are putting up Mark Warner, whom I just do not get and doesn't
do it for me. The last time he talked about Iraq it was in the most circular
rhetoric that made me dizzy from the spin. We need that like we need another
Republican in the White House. Then there's Obama. But if we're talking outsiders, let's talk Brian Schweitzer.
No one is inevitable anymore, least of all Senator Hillary Clinton. But regardless
of all the talk about wanting a progressive candidate, most Democratic voters
still long for one thing and one thing only: a candidate who is electable.
Before Hillary's disastrous TBA speech she was touted as the one to beat. That is no longer the case. If she were,
James Carville and Mark Penn, a current adviser to Hillary's Senate campaign, wouldn't be pleading her case in the Post. Right now Hillary's on damage control, because if she loses her luster not only will she not be inevitable, but the choice to run in '08 will already be made and not by her.