The Hillary Clinton locomotive is steaming along the track, and as per 2004 the bulk of Democratic primary voters are all to glad to jump on board, convinced that a nominee is needed by Christmas. If polling is to be believed, we appear also to be convinced that Ms. Clinton should be that nominee.
Are we that stupid?
The only way the Democratic party can guarantee a loss in November 2008 is to nominate Clinton. She is without a doubt the most divisive figure in modern politics (I'd cite President Bush, but you can't be divisive if everybody is equally tired of you), and her nomination would immediately alienate most independent and swing voters, precisely those prepared to consider a Democrat in 2008. Part of the problem is her access to the money and organization built by her and hubby Bill fifteen years ago. Part of the the problem is the liberal nature of Democratic primary voters (just as Republican'ts suffer from their neo-con base). The biggest issue is women, who make up a huge number of those Democratic primary voters. It seems that the merest possibility of voting for a woman for President is so intoxicating for women that it hardly matters if that person is the best choice to send into the general election, or to serve in the office. I'm all for a woman President. My boss is a woman, as are many of the upper management where I work. My generation and younger, who grew up with equal rights, pretty much ignore gender in politics. But it's killing the Democrats right now, and if we nominate Clinton then we stand to get waxed come November 2008.
If we wanted to win, we would take a long look at John Edwards, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, or Chris Dodd. Even Obama is intriguing, though I am unconvinced he is ready. What I fear is a reprise of 2004, when Kerry became our nominee and we all followed him off the cliff.
No comments:
Post a Comment