The Coming Hillary Clinton Train Wreck

[cali]

Do people really think that a Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign is a good idea—for the Democratic Party, our collective sanity, even for her? Maybe it doesn’t matter; some political locomotives just move ahead, even if the wreck is predestined, and her campaign is now coming around the bend. There is talk of the real rollout beginning this week, which may make for slightly odd timing given that a better focus might be on introducing Obamacare, aspects of which go into effect October 1st. Bill Clinton is supposed to be helping with that. Then again, it’s also the week of the big Clinton party, the Clinton Global Initiative summit, with all sorts of worldly people in town for the General Assembly, too. That could help Hillary, who will introduce her husband and Obama at the summit tonight, and whose name, with her daughter’s, has been added to the name of the Foundation. But there are also two new magazine stories out, at least one of which won’t help her at all.

New York has a big profile, by Joe Hagan, all about Hillary Clinton as her own powerful person—after Bill, after the First Lady stint and all those Clinton scandals, the woman in the plane with the BlackBerry and her own relationships with world leaders. She visited a lot of them, as Secretary of State. And while many don’t think she had particular big ideas (“For foreign-policy critics, some of this could look like wheel spinning”), her allies tell the magazine that’s just because they haven’t properly theorized the making of connections itself:

Clinton’s State team argues that Clinton was a great stateswoman, her ambition to touch down in as many countries as possible a meter of how much repair work she did to the nation’s image abroad.

There could be something to that—but whose image, and, one might add, whose connections? What is striking is that the Hillary-at-State philosophy is awfully like the one practiced by Bill at his foundation, though money is more openly on the table there. During an official visit, when the plane lands and the dinner with local influential figures begins, the material aspect is merely implied. In both cases, good can come of it. And for an idea of the unpleasant places the solicitation of donors can lead, read Alec MacGillis’s New Republic piece on Doug Band, one of Bill Clinton’s key aides and the man whose job, in part, seems to have been translating dollar figures into Clinton access. There were a lot of rides on private and corporate planes, and other favors that Band helped broker, but the Clintons received. “By his tally, he has accompanied the former president to nearly 125 countries and 2,000 cities,” MacGillis writes. (Hillary visited a hundred and twelve countries during her Secretary of Stateship.) But, her aides tell New York, each of those miles marked distance from Bill—toward her own ends: he was“Not a presence,” says a close State aide. “And I don’t mean that just literally. But not someone who was built into the system in any way. He had a very minimal presence in her time at the State Department.

<snip>

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/closeread/2013/09/the-coming-hillary-clinton-2016-campaign-train-wreck.html

[joeybee12]

1. And the Clintons are the only politicians in the history of this country...

To use well-connected people and broker deals...yeesh. People really must be convinced Hilary is running since they're trashing her already.

[Chan790]

10. To be fair, I've been trashing her since she was my Senator. n/t

[FSogol]

51. Remember the Washington Post article that accused her of being ambitious?

CDS will be like ODS on steroids.

[truedelphi]

53. I think Bill Clinton being on a TV show to further her run yesterday

Probably means the Clintons are considering her running for the nation's highest position.

[LiberalAndProud]

67. I am conviced she is runnig.

It has nothing to do with how much trashing is being done. My opinion has to do with the amount of grassroot styled astroturf is being sodded about.

[1000words]

2. mmmmmm ... buttery.

[msanthrope]

5. I prefer mine with bourbon for threads like this. nt

[Laurian]

3. Do we really have to start this shit already?

[TheKentuckian]

8. The Hillary the Inevitable crap started before the inauguration so as per the always

Don't start nothing, won't be nothing but they always be starting something.

[bunnies]

14. TheKentuckin is right.

The shove Hillary down everybody's throat crowd has been full on for a while now. Even worse, Chelsea is being inaugurated in another thread.

[HappyMe]

17. Yeah, I'm tired of the Inevitable thing.

For one thing, she has not said a damn thing about running. I also haven't heard anything about what her policies would be.

[bunnies]

18. I was barely over Clinton fatigue from 2008.

Didnt they learn anything from last time? They do more harm than good with that crap. Policies? Meh. Its Hillary!

[HappyMe]

21. I kind of wonder if the people that say that

Obama is too centrist are already inaugurating Clinton.

[bunnies]

30. lol.

Too centrist because they want someone more to the right perhaps.

[HappyMe]

32. Who knows?

I am hoping for a primary. I would like to see what a couple of candidates have to say.

[bunnies]

46. Agreed.

A primary would be nice. Im wondering who will have the guts to go against the inevitable one if she runs. Im afraid that some might sit it out over not wanting to get in the Clintons crosshairs. Who knows. Exactly.

[HappyMe]

47. It's not as if another candidate wouldn't

have any ammo against her.

[bunnies]

48. True enough.

There certainly is no shortage of that. And just imagine the RW's glee at getting the opportunity to scream about Benghazi for a year or so. OMG. My head would explode.

[fadedrose]

63. No, he's just too polite to say no

when they keep following him around making speeches.

Our explainer-in-chief president pretty well described Congress' role in the CR and debt ceiling matter coming up without an interpreter.

[Myrina]

28. +1

n/t

[lamp_shade]

4. Aw jeeze

[polichick]

6. Not enough about policy - unless you conclude that...

her policy initiatives would be all about wealthy donors, which wouldn't be a big stretch I guess.

[gopiscrap]

7. Interesting, not sure I agree!

[randome]

9. No more trains until 2016. Plenty of time to repair the tracks.

But I would prefer that she simply step off and take a cab or something. In some other direction.


[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[fletchthedubs]

29. Agree

I rarely agree with any of your posts here, but you are spot on with this. And I love your sig line, an idea I try to act on everyday.

[FarCenter]

11. 2016 is a long way off

In 2007, what would you have predicted for 2010?

[Kelvin Mace]

12. I would prefer to have seen

HRC as a Supreme Court Justice instead of president because:

1) The massive pain it would cause the Rush Limbaugh/Tea Party crown. I mean we are talking about wailing and gnashing of teeth down to the gum line.

2) She would not have political pressure from centrists to be conservative.

3) I really think we need a genuine liberal in the job and we have not had one arguably since Carter, probably LBJ.

[hughee99]

19. I think HRC would have an easier time getting elected president

then she would getting the votes she needs in the Senate for an SC confirmation hearing.

[Kelvin Mace]

58. I think the GOP would get crucified by the public

for block her. The naked ugly would be on the display in a manner that would absolutely discredit them. And, the blood would be on their hands since they would have o own the opposition. In a presidential campaign, third party PACs can do the dirty work.

[hughee99]

60. I don't think it would JUST be the repukes that would be fighting her...

Some would argue that the SC isn't the place for partisan political figures, and given Clinton's prominence over the past 20 years on the political scene and the fact that she hasn't really been a practicing lawyer over that time, it's going to be really easy for Dems to pass on her as well.

[Kelvin Mace]

61. Wait a sec

I have to get up from the floor where I have lay laughing for the last five minutes, not at you but at the concept that the SCOTUS isn't the place for partisan political figures.

Will you tell Fat Tony or shall I?

Thomas was a bad judge AND a bad lawyer and he still got appointed.

Any Dem who "passed" on her would be out of office next election.

[hughee99]

62. How many people KNEW Fat Tony was a partisan political figure beforehand?

How many knew about Thomas beforehand?

It's a REALLY easy case to make to the general public that a partisan political figure such as Clinton, that EVERYONE already knows, who has never been a judge and hasn't really practiced law in 20 years, and who is approaching 70 years old, is not the BEST candidate for the bench. The backlash you think you're going to see will sound more like crickets. No president is going to use up any of their "dry powder" to push for Clinton.

[Kelvin Mace]

64. Anyone paying attention

Thomas was blatantly partisan, which is why he BARELY scraped by. Roberts and Alito had SERIOUS issues about their objectivity and conflicts of interest and it was well discussed in the press, but they had an easy time of it.

Again, not taking a dig at you, just made me glad I wasn't drinking when I read that. Carbonated soft drinks burn going through your nose.

[hughee99]

65. Based on the opposition you see to Clinton right here on the DU,

I'm not sure why you think it's as slam dunk and that there will be a groundswell of support for her if the republicans try to block her nomination.

And, of course, "anyone paying attention" is almost no one when someone no one ever heard of gets nominated.

[JHB]

20. I keep pointing out to people that the SC doesn't actually have a "liberal" wing anymore...

It has a conservative wing and a non-conservative wing. And the conservative wing is heavy with radicals, nothing anywhere close to that in the other direction.

[Kelvin Mace]

57. True, but I think she would drift more left as a Justice

and further right as president.

[cloudbase]

13. Paging g4a, paging g4a.

Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

[madinmaryland]

43. Hillary 45. Michelle in 2024/28. Chelsea 47 in

2032/36

[Beacool]

15. Blah, blah, blah from the usual crowd.

At this point, I fervently hope that Hillary runs. The tearing of the vestments, the hand wringing, the constant trashing has achieved such a feverish pitch that it has gone from the pathetic to the comical.

I don't know which side is more anguished about a potential Hillary run, if it's the far Right or the far Left.

Either way, it won't matter. This is not 2008, if Hillary runs there's a very good likelihood that she will win.

Fasten your seatbelts, it's gong to be a bumpy ride.

[dionysus]

25. this will keep you warm Bea!

[Beacool]

38. That's a bankie I can endorse!!!!

Thank you, sweetie!!!

You always know how to brighten a gal's day.

[truebluegreen]

56. There is no Far Left. Not in this country, not in positions of political influence.

Unless you consider an FDR liberal the loony left. There are a few of those.

[antigop]

16. Hillary Clinton's Business Legacy at the State Department (leading part in drafting TPP)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=67554

[bigtree]

22. jesus

. . . that's ripe.

[brooklynite]

23. I predict that Hillary Clinton will be TROUNCED by.....

...Elizabeth Warren (not running). Okay, how about:

...Brian Schweitzer (supports gun rights) Okay, how about:

...Howard Dean (supporting Hillary Clinton) Okay, how about:

...Andrew Cuomo (won't run if she does) Okay, how about:

...Martin O'Malley (ditto) Okay, how about.....

[FrodosPet]

59. ...Dennis Kucinich (Faux Snooze and Ron Paul) Okay, how about:

...Al Franken (copyrights and supported the President on Syria) Okay, how about:

...Cory Booker (big business, didn't sufficiently hate on Romney) Okay, how about:

...John Conyers (Louis Farrakhan supporter, wife went to jail for corruption) Okay, how about:

...Alan Grayson (Agreed with Sarah Palin about "Let Allah sort them out" in Syria) Okay, how about...

[Pretzel_Warrior]

24. UNREC! The Clinton Haters on DU are sad/amusing

[HappyMe]

26. I don't hate her.

I think she should announce something one way or another. If she is running, let's see some policy stuff.

I would prefer somebody a bit more progressive.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

27. It would be highly unusual for any potential

Candidate to get into specifics over 3 years ahead of the actual election.

[HappyMe]

31. I suppose you are right.

People here are already helping her pack to move into the WH.

I'm kind of hoping for a primary.

[polichick]

34. Anytime a poster uses the word "hater"...

he or she has nothing.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

35. okay. but this OP was nothing but a link to a joke of an opinion piece sliming Hillary

so I choose to think this type of post over 3 years away from 2016 election is preemptive garbage trying to drag down Hillary. Pointless, actually. Thus the hater description.

It was as useful to the current day conversations as Ted Cruz's speechifying.

[Beacool]

39. Hear, hear!!!!!

[HappyMe]

41. If she does run, people had better get

used to her getting knocked around in opinion pieces and the media. Being Hillary doesn't exempt her from the same criticism and bashing that Obama gets now.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

44. that is true. and we are free to pull our hair out that such hit pieces are linked on DU

that is all.

[HappyMe]

45. Pull away.

It will grow back.

[LanternWaste]

52. I'll add "dynasty" to that, too.

I'll add "dynasty" to that, too. Both in-substantive and invalid.

[cali]

50. I don't hate her. I don't think Amy Davidson does either

Davidson is someone I pay attention to and I post her articles frequently

but whatever to the the adorer apologist sycophants slobbering at the feet of their idols.

(call me a hater, honey, and I'll dish it back with extra helpings)

[Laelth]

33. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[Pretzel_Warrior]

36. kudos. you've been exposed.

[Laelth]

55. Cool. Do I win a prize? n/t

-Laelth

[spin]

37. No more Clintons and definitely no more Bushes in the White House. (n/t)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

42. ^^ time to move on ^^

[Auntie Bush]

66. OK ... I'll be happy to move on...right after Hillary finishes her 2nd term.

[truedelphi]

54. Feel the same way. n/t

[hrmjustin]

40. I like her but I respect others right not to like her.

I think she will be our next president. I voted for her for senate twice and president in the primaries.

[okieinpain]

49. lol, is it 2016 already. if president Obama was smart

He would have his people drop hints that Hillary is running every other week. Everybody would be so busy with hill he could get a million things done with no one even knowing. Lol, let Clinton circus begin.

[geek tragedy]

68. What Clinton offers most is the certainty of defeating the GOP nominee.

Considering that nominee could be Ted Cruz, such a guarantee should not be discounted.