Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
2020 Hindsight
In the New York Post, Michael Goodwin says Hillary Clinton is onto something.
I believe he’s onto something. It started in 1998. It was always hard for me to believe Hillary was actually planning to run for President. Yet it always seemed vaguely plausible. That is, until it was obvious.
Why did First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton want to become a Senator from New York? The obvious reason would be to establish a track record to run for higher office, but Hillary the future Presidential candidate, seemed far-fetched. She denied it, dismissed it and laughed about it. She was focused on helping downtrodden upstate New Yorkers get jobs and feed their families. That’s all. It didn’t ring true, but could she really become President? She ran for re-election in 2006 winning her seat easily and in that contest remained taciturn about a Presidential run in 2008.
But of course she ran, and lost to Obama and many of us thought that it was probably over for her. 2016 looked like a futuristic world and surely Democrats would have moved on by then.
However, it began to look again more likely after she left her duties to the Empire Staters to enhance her resume as Secretary of State. As the years passed it looked pretty clear she was preparing a 2016 run. That time, we knew.
But following her ignominious and wholly unexpected defeat – which seems like yesterday – many of us thought her career was over for sure this time. She was falling down, seizing up, blaming, shaming and defaming everywhere. She was hated by many Democrats for running a bad campaign, for her treatment of Bernie Sanders in the primaries, and for losing to the clown Trump.
Like the modern audience watching a horror film, we know that the motionless psychopath submerged in the bathtub will bolt upright any second now to continue her blood-thirsty rampage. The timing of these scenes have shortened considerably over the years, the audience can’t be given too much time to catch the setup. Long enough to have them believe it’s finally over, but not too long. “Of course!” We say to ourselves, “and there’s 20 minutes left in playing time!” But we love to be fooled. That’s why they call it the willing suspension of disbelief.
There are several other reasons why it makes sense for Hillary to undertake another run: the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative both rely on the idea that a Clinton might just someday become President in order to leverage funding and influence. (It’s not going to be Chealsea anytime soon…) Without that prospect, why should anyone donate? There are all kinds of worthy charities out there.
She’s feeling the loss of transactional power already. Impending candidacy is necessary to use as an intimidation mechanism to discourage attacks from disillusioned allies.
And who in the Democratic Party has the inside track for 2020 that would be formidable? Joe Biden? A few considerably less experienced women? Who in her center-left lane can mount a serious challenge?
And she wants it. She wants it badly.
So the horror film, coming soon to an election near you, will be another sequel, and like all sequels, coming with a new angle. This time the psychopath goes after her own family in a vindictive narcissistic rage.
Will there be another sequel in the franchise? (working title – Hillary III: Vengeance is Mine)
How will this play out for the Democrat party?
Published in General, Politics
“Alex, I’ll take Socialist Senators from Vermont for $200.”
I’ve never been to a dinner party, but maybe.
As long as she’s a candidate, she can vacuum up donations to her campaign/PACs and “charities”.
I doubt her doctors have been able to adjust her medication to the point that she will be healthier at 72-73 in 2020 than at 68-69 in 2016.
My guess is that she pulls out after the Iowa caucuses to play power broker.
Anyone that craves power that badly, when she could be contributing positively in other ways – like all the humanitarian projects she claims her foundation does, is seriously dangerous – see the recent elections in Turkey and Russia….I thought Trump had a big ego… She seems to be doing fundraisers? For what? Has she been to the border? Does she visit hospitals? What is she doing post-politics?
She’s ‘persisting’. It’s all the rage.
I think Felony’s lust for power is such that she’ll make another attempt, but the Democrats won’t have her. They’re looking for a bright, shiny, social-democrat minority (doubling down on socialism and identity politics) to carry the banner. That makes Bernie obsolete as well.
How this plays out for the Dems, I dunno. But, it will be fun to watch.
Moderator Note:
Let's get back to Franco's topic.ADOTOTHRC? [Any Democrat Over Trump Other Than HRC?]
Think about that, Gary.
The first step to getting better is to admit you have a problem.I bought the Wizard of Oz soundtrack, on cassette, in 1993 so I could play Ding Dong the Witch is Dead when Bill was defeated in 1996. Alas, we know how the next twenty plus years played out. I was ecstatic on election night when Trump was able to keep her from returning to the White House. However, I didn’t bring out the song. One, I don’t know where the tape is and two, is she really gone?
I did. I made it my ringtone for a couple of weeks and then switched back to my usual.
Oh, come on!
The first line of defense is to primary Trump.
The second line of defense would be a viable third party challenge, be that Kasich or Weld.
The third line of defense would be for the Dems to nominate a non-crook, non-socialist.
The fourth line of defense would be to decline to vote on the Presidential line for the first time in my life.
The fifth line of defense would be to flip a coin, not unlike the drawing of lots which is repeatedly referenced in the Bible.
Wonderful thread, Franco! I’m going to make sure we stay on topic! :)
I, for one, hope she does run again next election. I will be voting against her (again) and a potato could beat that woman!
Moderator Note:
Let's get back on topic please. Franco's post isn't about Gary.I don’t think that word “viable” means what you think it does.Paying for indulgences?
Moderator Note:
By "pushing back", you are continuing to make it about Gary, not Franco's OP. Franco complained earlier about the comments section of another of his OPs becoming all about Gary rather than the OP. So what is it you want here? It can't be both ways.Gary started it! Literally. In comment #1 he made the conversation about his distaste for Trump. But, we’re not allowed to push back?
Besides, if we were at a dinner party having this conversation, I would advise Gary to seek help. Compassionately.
As Klavan says, we’re living in good times in which the Left [and Nevers] are unhappy. I want Gary to be able to enjoy the good times. Life is hard enough as it is without Trump disturbing your peace. Every day we wake up without Hillary as our president is a major blessing. I think Gary might agree with that. Lets hope we are so blessed into the future, whatever Hillary’s ambitions.
Regarding Moderator comments:
The post posits a potential Hillary campaign and it’s effect on the democrat party.
One of those effects is that she might in fact win the nomination. Although I consider it very unlikely.
Nevertheless, Is it unreasonable to consider the effect of a potential 2020 Hillary v Trump rematch and it’s effect on the rabidly anti-Trump “Conservatives”, particularly those who consider Kasich or Weld “viable” alternatives in a national election?
Asking for a friend…
The amateurs among them may quietly vote for Trump and lie about it. The punditocracy will have bet the farm on Hillary and will campaign for her hoping for crumbs from the queen’s table.
It’s not unreasonable to imagine how some people might react to such a rematch, but we need to keep discussion on topic instead of allowing this thread to devolve into personal attacks, regardless of how one might feel about other site members. I don’t want Franco’s thread to die on the vine.
The way things are going now, I think President Trump would beat her like a rented mule.
Absent some actual scandal* I am fully onboard the Trump Train in 2020. Dad (God rest his soul) was right.
*(Russiagate, Stormygate, childrenincagesgate et al are democratic talking points, promoted by their mouthpieces and the media, but I repeat myself)
I dunno – we do have to take into account the avalanche of lawsuits about to plague the SEIU – absent even more robust help from democrat operatives and the media (but I repeat myself) – I don’t know how she is going to get the necessary exposure.
What’s Raoul Castro up to? Nicolas Maduro might have some time on his hands in the future.
I dunno. She seems the ideal candidate to speak for the large progressive bloc in the Undead American community.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she tries again. Hillary’s presidential ambitions are keeping her alive! Makes me think of The Picture of Dorian Gray…
The Democrats I know, a certainly unscientific polling, were unenthusiastic for Hillary and appalled at Obama’s Bathroom Wars nonsense (now a de facto plank in the Democratic platform).
If Roe v. Wade is overturned by 2020, or its overturning is thought to be imminent, the Democratic base will be galvanized. Clinton would be an avatar of backlash, though Elizabeth Warren could probably also bottle that lightning. Joe Biden not so much.
I don’t see Warren going all in until the Clinton mob throws down their hand.
Good topic, Franco.
Why?
If Roe V Wade is overturned, abortion will remain just as legal as it is now in Blue states like California and New York and Illinois.
In Red states it will be more restricted ( I have my doubts that it will be made 100% “illegal” anywhere).
Fear-mongers gonna fear-monger.
That’s between her and the Lord. She won’t be post-politics until she reaches room temperature.
That’s assuming she is presently alive. Some say she’s lying stiff and cold in an upstairs bedroom, next door to a hotel run by Peter Daou.
Predicting post-Roe politics across the American map is pretty perilous, especially if you think that only two positions will fight this one out across the nation.
In some states it will be outright prohibitionists versus the exceptions advocates. In others the generally opposed will face off against the safe, legal, early and rare tribe. In bluer states it will be the safe, legal and earlier group against the infanticidists.
I am not sure that in all of these scenarios the “proer” life position might not have the upper hand.
And of course in some states there will be four or five faction splits.
I side with life morally and politically in the long run.
I have long held that the Jeb Bush candidacy was a integral force that allowed Trump to get the nomination.
Jeb set off alarm bells with many Republicans as a sure sign the GOP was out of touch and on a losing path. Second, Jeb sucked up the lions share of donor cash, and together with the entrenched Bush legacy network, discouraged other establishment type GOP candidates. In another coincidence, the other viable Republican semi-moderate, Marco Rubio, shared home state Florida canceling any advantage he had to take the upper hand.
In 2016, the field was clear for Hillary. The only challenge was from her left in Bernie.
This time there has to be more resistance from even the center left, but the farther left will be absolutely livid. Last time they at least thought she would win. Her losing made it even worse. This time more ( not all, they have so many delusions) will question her viability. But the pundit and politico class might remain with her like Andrea Mitchell.
This is how it’s like Jeb. Most ordinary voting Republicans knew he had no chance in the general.
So the longer Hillary stays viable, the more the party will drift toward the farther left candidate to defeat her. But this dynamic screams out for a “desperation savior “ candidate – an outsider like an Oprah or Bloomberg.
In any case, a huge fight is looming.
I agree on Jeb! It felt too much like the “fix was in” so to speak. We the voters we to do as we were told, and the donors and other “elite” were going to pick him.