The inevitable Clinton presidency
Posted by Matt Clifford on February 7th, 2007
This is very interesting. Apparently several senior Republicans are now talking of a Hillary presidency as “virtually inevitable”. This will be news to a lot of people, not least the betting markets, which still put her chances at around 25%.
Now if Bill were allowed to run, a President Clinton might well seem the inevitable result. Further to the Google Trends I posted the other day, it’s interesting to note that Bill Clinton is still more searched for than any of the major Democratic candidates.
Filed under: election2008, uspolitics on February 7th, 2007
Isn’t it possible this is a massive spin attempt on the part of the Republicans, though? (yes, I refuse to trust anything Tom DeLay or Newt Gingrich says, it’s true) If they persuade all the conservatives that Hillary’s the inevitable candidate then it’ll terrify them so much they’ll support anyone, even Giuliani.
Otherwise, what would be the sense in looking like you’re scared of a candidate who hasn’t even won the nomination yet?
On the point about the googling….this might be a stupid point, but Hillary Clinton’s website is http://www.hillaryclinton.com. Therefore, if you’re a person with any kind of vague intelligence, you could probably guess what it was and get there without googling. Looking up info on Bill Clinton, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter…(although I may be basing this on my own personal googling, which has inevitably contained the words ‘Bill Clinton’ many, many times)
I’m not sure it is a spin attempt. The most recent polls have Hillary edging even Giuliani out and positively trouncing him in NY. It’s possible they just think it’s really not looking good.
On the Google thing, I would completely agree that people ought to be able to find Hillary without searching, but . . . you should never underestimate how clueless the broad mass of web users are. For example, the most searched for term on Google is “Yahoo”:
Surely they are just trying to scare Republicans so much that they’ll donate and participate in campaigns, anything to stop evil Hillary? Hence Tom DeLay’s stuff about disaster “if we don’t use everything available to us and motivate our base, the people that believe in us.”
Also, as you two seem to know your American political onions, the primaries have always puzzled me. Does anyone mind that the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire are more important in this process than anyone else? For something so undemocratic, I’ve never noticed any complaints about it.
It’s a big issue in every election cycle - generally there’s some attempt by other states to move their own primaries forward. For obvious (though, as you say, hardly democratic) reasons, Iowa and New Hampshire are never that keen on this, to put it mildly. In fact New Hampshire has a law that says it must be the first primary (though what it would do if another state passed a similar one, I’m not sure).
This article, despite coming from Fox News, is a good summary of the way it’s looking this year.
Fox News has been mentioned on the Clare Politics blog? Matt, what is the world coming to?
Patrick, I think the primary system is stupid. I also think the electoral college is even more stupid. For both those reasons it always amuses me when Americans go on about their democratic history and Constitution (especially since James Madison was so adamantly against letting the masses have much of a say in politics, which I find hysterical). Anyway. I suppose the trouble is, there’ll never be reform because that would go against something so traditionally American…seeing as we haven’t managed to reform the House of Lords yet, I would think that it’s going to take a long, long time in the States. Even something as blatantly undemocratic as the result of the 2000 election didn’t seem to change a thing.
But there has been discussion about it. There’s an interesting post here on The Fix where people discuss the primary situation (just to give us a perspective other than the esteemed one of Fox News)
Despite this, I meant to add, the primaries and the whole long-drawn out process does make the whole thing much more fun for all us American political news-watching geeks. And, arguably, I suppose, it gives underdogs more of a chance…because even though there is the (extremely difficult) fundraising hurdle, it does mean it’s not a coronation.
And in keeping with the image I’m cultivating on this blog of me being a West Wing freak, I’d like to add that there’s a good episode where they discuss the primaries, called Hartsfields Landing, and it’s in Season 3.