Both of you make good points, but let’s start from the assumption that Hillary does want to be President. Assuming that at some point she wants to run, when is the best time for her to try?
What harm comes from Hillary trying in 2004? If she has a good chance of getting the nomination, what is the downside to trying? Like Lieberman she could remain a Senator, right? It’s not as though her career would be over, it’s hardly begun. Losing an attempt for a nomination is no kiss of death historically.
Obviously, if Bush really is vulnerable right now to any Democratic candidate, as is the premise of this thread, then RIGHT NOW would be the time to run. 11/04 is still a long time and breaking news from now. But, since now is not an option, a late run in the 04 race might keep Hillary above the early fray and cast her as the uniter of the party stepping in to return the party to past Clintonian glory.
A new Democrat for the new milennium, I give you Senator Hillary Clinton, your next president of the United States. Oh, and her husband, the next First Mate, Gillig…I mean Bill.
Didn’t she more or less rule out a 2004 run? She could back out of that but only at a cost. And she would have to enter a very competitive fray and if she wins the nomination it would be like a re-run of 2000 in many ways. Gore decided it wouldn’t work so it’s hard to see why Hillary would try.
Her best chance is 2008 if the Democrats lose in 2004. She will have a lot more experience and the Clinton scandals will be more distant. Plus if Bush doesn’t have a new VP in 2004 there will be someone new on the GOP ticket and Hillary could even have a decent shot at the big prize.
If the economy tanks, and the war in Iraq goes badly, Hillary will have her best shot at running. She can then draw on her husband’s Presidentcy and say something like, “Every administration has its problems, but we never got into a mess like the current one the country’s in now. It took a Clinton to clean up one Bush’s mess, and it’ll take another Clinton to clean up this Bush’s mess!” (Note that the beauty of this is that Chelsea Clinton can use this against whichever of the next generation of Bushes makes it to the White House! 
)
Here’s the Presidency for the next few decades:
George Bush
Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
Hillary Clinton
Jeb Bush
Chelsea Clinton
Jennifer Bush
You know, when you think about it, there are some people who haven’t even been president ONCE. I think it’s sad that these families keep hogging it all to themselves.
You forgot George P. Bush. My wife always mentions him. The should interbreed and make it one big royal family.
Oh, God, I just got a visual of George P. Bush morphed with Chelsea Clinton a-la Late Night with Conan O’Brien. Ugh.
I don’t understand why people think Hillary Clinton would have a chance in a nation-wide contest. She has been portrayed as the lesbian-loving, utterly amoral, devil-incarnate cold uber-bitch that worships new age Satan idols… for more a decade day in, day out, in most of the country. Fair or not, that’s not a smear campaign you can just get over because you kissed a few babies and made some one-liners.
—Jennifer Bush—
Why not Barbara? I mean, she’s the Yalie, after all.
Be prepared to grow very old and very tired before you are finished “explaining” Bush’s election theft. Some crimes take a LOT of explaining.
As for the problems of the various Democratic candidates – there is no candidate so clean that the Republican media machine can’t spin up all sorts of crap about them. It doesn’t matter if the claims are true or untrue (as is the case of much of the claims about Hillary) the accusations will still fly.
The Dems don’t need to worry so much about having a clean candidate, but for having a good strategy to deal with the inevitable Repub smear campaign. I don’t see much sign of that happening. As has been said, the Dems have been incredibly inept in the last couple of election cycles. The party itself needs new leadership.
They did.
George Will pointed out that every Presidential election since 1964 has been won by either a conservative Republican, or a Southern Democrat. Hilary is the junior Senator - from New York.
The war with Iraq will be over by the next Presidential election. The economy will probably be picking up, but all coverage of the economy by the mainstream media will be negative, so people who believe what they see on TV will not know it.
If Democrats convince themselves they have the election wrapped up, they will be able to wring defeat from the jaws of victory. If they run some retread like Hilary, Bush will be re-elected. She has all the negatives of her husband, with none of the charm.
Not that any of this speculation means doodly squat twenty months before the election.
Regards,
Shodan
Odd - part of the usual RW Hillary-bashing has been that she’s a carpetbagger. Is the dittohead consensus now that she really is a New Yorker, not an Arky or an Illinoisan?
I think the consensus is that Hilary is from whereever she needs to be, will say whatever she needs to say, put up with whatever she needs to (Bill) and finally do whatever it takes to be in the white house.
But back to the op. Someone above nailed it. Plug in any actual democrat, running or not and recheck your figures.
Well, according to the poll, Hillary would have little trouble winning the nomination (37% of democrats would prefer her, were she to run; next closest Gephardt with 13%).
In addition to the other stuff mentioned, I think she would get a lot of sympathy votes-- both from people who feel she was betrayed by her husband and from people who feel she has been unfairly smeared by the conservative press.
Back on the poll numbers, among those actually running, Lieberman has the largest minority, with 21% of Dems prefering him. What the hell are they thinking??? The only difference between him and Bush is a yarmulke! Can you just see the two of them in a ‘debate’ struggling to find things to differ over? The darling of the left, Howard Dean, gets 4%… less than Al Sharpton.
As to the swing voters, only 6% are very satisfied with the way things are going in the nation. This can’t bode well for Bush; 29% are very dissatified.
Just name recognition at this point, nogginhead. Check again when the campaign ads and news coverage really get underway.
But name recognition was what got BUSH JUNIOR nominated! You don’t really think he was the finest presidential timber in the Republican forest in '98-'99?
Oops… meant to clarify that these were the self-identified independents.
I believe the war with Iraq will start soon (next week), be over soon (week after), and by election day 2004 the economy will be where it was just prior to 9-11, which was rebounding from the Clinton bubble burst. Cheney will probably step down due to his health and GWB will talk McCain into being his running mate.
I get so damned tired reading about how stupid and dumb some of these liberals say President Bush is! He didn’t learn to fly a jet fighter by being stupid! He didn’t get to the White House by being dumb! Don’t believe everything the Democrapmachine is pumping out–think for yourself!!
No, McCain was. And I’ll still vote for him whenever he runs, no matter the party.
Who said he was stupid? You’re projecting your own fears and insecurities. I believe he got to the White House by being the son of a rich and famous man, by lying through his teeth whenever his advisors told him to, and by having a majority on the Supreme Court appointed by members of his party.
But I don’t think he’s dumb.
Amen to that, brother. Now there is a hero and a man of integrity. I disagree with him on many points, but I trust him.