How Obama is Setting the Stage for Hillary in 2016

[Beacool]

Claims that the Democrats' leftward shift will hurt Hillary Clinton in 2016 miss the point—liberals disappointed with Obama's concessions will elect to a warrior. By David Frum

Peter Beinart says the Democratic party is shifting to the left. He's right. He says that this shift spells trouble for Hillary Clinton in 2016. He's wrong. Or anyway, it's well within Hillary Clinton's power to prove him wrong.

People who write about politics are adept with words and excited by political ideas -- that's true almost by definition. But those are unusual skills and interests, even among people who care a lot about politics. Most of us are less moved by ideas than by emotions; more by music than by words.

From this point of view, "left" and "right" are not logical categories. They are not about policy, not about programs. They are about about identity, about tribes, about loyalty.

And it is from this point of view that President Obama has been found wanting by many liberals and progressives. He's just not a tribal guy! Since he emerged on the national scene back in 2004, Barack Obama's big guiding idea has been the unreality of American political divisions: "There's not a liberal America and a conservative America; there's the United States of America." Campaigning against Hillary Clinton in 2008, Obama again and again denounced the "old politics" practiced by certain unnamed Democratic politicians, promising instead a new era of consensus and progress. "We can be a party that tries to beat the other side by practicing the same do-anything, say-anything, divisive politics that has stood in the way of progress; or we can be a party that puts an end to it." He warned against "nominating a candidate who will unite the other party against us" and urged instead that Democrats choose "one who can unite this country around a movement for change" – i.e., him.

That plan went pretty spectacularly wrong.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/15/how-obama-is-setting-the-stage-for-hillary-in-2016.html

[DebJ]

1. Thanks. Interesting perspective. n/t

[Beacool]

5. You're welcome.

[The Straight Story]

2. Dems rejected Hillary because they wanted a change in DC

Many feel there wasn't enough change and going back to Hillary would be a step back in that regards.

Nothing personal against her, I just don't see her winning the primary (if she even decides to run).

On her upside, she has been around politics and probably has more qualifications than anyone else running, from living in the WH for 8 years and making connections to congress to sos. Not worried about what the right thinks about her (they will hate anyone with a D) and staunch dems will vote for who gets the nomination, it will come down to undecided voters and how she can play out to them. Again, if she can win over folks to win the primary.

[Beacool]

4. Dems did not reject Hillary.

She won the votes of more registered Democrats than Obama did. Remember that some states hold open primaries.

As for the primaries, if she runs, she wins. This is not 2008.

[Whisp]

10. That's Hillary - can't do it right the first time.

Iraq war vote, primaries in 2008m etc., etc.,. Shuck ems, blew it, but I can try again!

Builds confidence in her abilities. (I got eyes too!)

[Jefferson23]

3. Affect will matter more than policy....

Then we're screwed.

[polichick]

6. "...or we can be a party that puts an end to it" and just become the other side.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Gosh, a Neo-con defends Hillary...how novel.

Hawks of a feather....

[Oilwellian]

8. I was gonna say...

David Frum? Really? Didn't he learn anything about why Hillary failed the first time?

[ProSense]

14. Peter Beinart signed the PNAC letter

http://www.publiceye.org/pnac_chart/pnac.html

Mark my words: This is all about setting up Hillary.

[ProSense]

15. More from Beinart:

At this (ridiculously early) juncture, it seems likely Hillary will be able to ride out her party’s lurch to the left. The more realistic danger may be that a lefty challenger forces her into positions that hurt her in the general election. Against Chris Christie, that could be a real worry. Against Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, not so much.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/06/hillary-clinton-s-big-challenges-in-2016-will-come-from-the-left.html

[Warren DeMontague]

9. Nice of Frum to take time off from his sky-is-falling hysteria over the prospect of legalized pot

to weigh in as an "expert" on 2016.

[pampango]

11. "Most of us are less moved by ideas than by emotions." We'll, republicans anyway.

I would change that sentence to: Most republicans are less moved by evidence than by emotions.

Confirmation bias.

[Laelth]

12. Interesting. k&r n/t

-Laelth

[ProSense]

13. LOL!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023676169#post2