Hillary Makes It Clear
For anyone who may have been doubting, there is now NO QUESTION that Hillary Clinton is running for president in 2008. In a series of speeches last week, she unofficially declared her candidacy. She did so by moderating her position on abortion and suggesting we teach abstinence; she condemned illegal immigration; she emphasized the importance of prayer in her life; and in each speech, she reminded her audiences that she supported the war in Iraq.
All of these positions are foreign to Ms. Clinton’s far left political passions over the years. There is no way she would swerve toward the center in this way unless she is running for president. No way. Next, I suppose she’ll be talking about how to strengthen the military even though she has despised it in the past. She will say anything.
While Hillary is busy moving to the center, the Democratic Party is about to move to the left. It now looks all but certain that Howard Dean will be elected the DNC chairman on February 12. Here’s how political analyst Dick Morris feels about it:
Quote:
|
What kind of chairman will Dean make? He will probably be as bad for the party’s prospects as Nancy Pelosi has been as Democratic leader in the House. He will dig a deeper and deeper hole for the party, alienating its moderate donors and holding it hostage to the likes of Michael Moore and the Hollywood left.
|
Interestingly, the Clintons have not mounted much of a fight to stop him, and political analysts in both parties are trying to figure out why. Why would they give up control of the party they’ve dominated for the last 12 years?
I have a suggestion. I believe it is just fine with the Clintons to see the Democratic Party veer to the left and essentially self-destruct. I think it is fine with the Clintons that many of the Dems in Congress remain intent on being obstructionists, even though the voting public is sick of it. Hillary, of course, will remain above the fray as she shifts toward the center.
I think it will be fine with the Clintons if the Democrats get spanked once again in the 2006 mid-term elections. If the Republicans gain even more seats in Congress in 2006, that will put the Democratic Party into a full-fledged crisis.
That sets the stage perfectly for Hillary, the centrist, to ride in on the proverbial white horse and save the party from the liberals. That’s the plan as I see it. Sadly, it might just work.
Hillary ranked far above any of the Democrats who ran for president last year, including John Kerry. So, she is popular. The question is, how many people will believe Hillary’s new centrist positions? How many will it turn off? I don’t know.
Certainly some voters will believe that by electing Hillary president, they will get Bill back in the White House. I suppose that is possible, but one wonders what Bill would have to gain by moving back to Washington and being under the microscope and Hillary’s thumb. Maybe he stays in New York.
Obviously, I could be wrong about the scenario laid out above. But when I hear Hillary soften her position on abortion and recommend teaching abstinence, no other scenario comes to mind but a run for the White House in 2008 as her party implodes in the meantime.
Finally, some of my Republican friends who are involved in politics believe that Hillary is “unelectable” because of all the skeletons in her past. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t agree – for two reasons. First, by 2008, how many voters are really going to remember Hillary’s questionable past? And second, who are the Republicans going to run in 2008? The GOP bench is pretty much empty.
I think Hillary can win the Democratic nomination in a cakewalk. And with Bill out there on the stump for her, she could win it all. Again, I hope I’m wrong!
Very best regards,
Gary D. Halbert
SPECIAL ARTICLES
Novak on why Dean is bad for the Dems.
http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak...t-novak31.html
Mort Kondracke defends Hillary, sort of.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Com...2_1_05_MK.html
Reinventing Hillary Clinton, again.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050...4527-2313r.htm
An interesting read from a liberal on the Social Security dilemma.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110006234