Hillary: I Should Have Paid Attention to That HolyCoast Guy

Well, she didn't really say that, but had she read my piece from January 2010 and followed my prediction she probably would be on her way to winning the Democrat nomination right now.  Here's part of what I wrote:

Here's a scenario that I think may become more realistic as the year unfolds. Should Obama and the Dems continue to slide, and especially if the Dems take a bloodbath in November, I look for Hillary to resign the Secretary of State's job sometime in early 2011. Nobody will believe she wants to "spend more time with her family" so she'll have to come up with another excuse. In reality, she'll be setting the table for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.

And she'll be very popular. She barely lost the nomination in 2008 and given Obama's performance and her work as Secretary of State, her star probably shines brighter today than ever. For one thing, she hasn't been in the news all that much and we haven't had to listen to her. That's gotta help.

So, with Hillary out of the Secretary of State's office, who will Obama choose to replace her? Here's where the scenario becomes even more interesting - Joe Biden. Biden's many years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be cited as the main reason to move him to SoS, though the real reason will have more to do with the fact that Biden will be a drag on the 2012 ticket. He's not seen as a viable future candidate for 2016 and frankly people are a little bit afraid that something will happen to Obama and we'll get stuck with President Biden.

This will give Obama and his political crew the opportunity to choose his potential successor, someone younger and more attractive as a 2016 candidate. Confirmation could be a bit problematic should the GOP pick up a bunch of Senate seats this year, but I don't know if they will have the stomach to filibuster a vice presidential nominee.

Meanwhile Hillary will be the Ted Kennedy of 2012, challenging the sitting president the way Kennedy challenged Carter in 1980 - only she'll win. The nomination, that is, but not necessarily the White House. That will depend on both the GOP nominee and voter feelings about Democrats in general. After four years of unbridled liberalism the voters may not be willing to take a chance that Hillary will be any better. Her history certainly suggests she just as much a lefty as Obama, though possibly more competent.

After seeing "Uncommitted" win 42% of the vote against Obama in Kentucky, unknown John Wolfe get 42% against Obama in Arkansas, and a federal prison inmate get 41% against him in West Virginia (all states that Bill Clinton won), there's little doubt to me that Hillary could have knocked Obama off in the primaries.  Democrat voters would have been willing to admit to a mistake in 2008 and rectify it in 2012.  For reasons I can't image, Hillary didn't go for it (despite the urgings of her husband, if the new Obama biography is to be believed).

Now there's a lot of talk about replacing Biden with Hillary.  I have a hard time believing that will happen.  Does she really want to be second banana to a guy who is as likely to lose as win this year?  Will voters suddenly overlook all of Obama's flaws and incompetence just because Hillary is the VP candidate?  I don't think so.  Hillary is no spring chicken and the years haven't been that kind to her.  If she's got an eye on being president, I don't think 2016 will be her year.  I think her year was 2012 and she passed on it.

Dem Pollsters: Obama Should Abandon His Campaign In Favor of Hillary Clinton

Since about January of '10 I've predicted that Hillary would get in the race the challenge Obama.  So far she's stayed out, but two Dem pollsters think it's time Obama got out of the way and let Hillary have the nomination:

President Obama should abandon his run for a second term and turn over the reins of the Democratic Party to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, two one-time Democratic pollsters wrote in Monday's Wall Street Journal, which appeared online Sunday.

Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen argued that just as Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson decided not to pursue additional runs though they could have, Obama should do the same.

“He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,”Caddell and Schoen wrote.

Caddell, who worked as a pollster for President Jimmy Carter, and Schoen, who was a pollster for President Bill Clinton, argue that Obama will inevitably have to run a negative campaign in order to win reelection, the negative consequences of which will make it difficult for him to govern effectively.

“One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be ‘guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it.’ The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline,” they write.

Caddell and Schoen say they write as “patriots and Democrats” who are concerned for their country, and they do not expect to play a direct role in any possible Clinton campaign.

I get the impression that Obama's ego would never let him admit that America might not want him to continue as president, and he certainly wouldn't want to back out in favor of Hillary and let everything think they should have gone with her in '08. I think he'll stay in until the bitter end, which hopefully will result in a Carter '80 type of drubbing.

Bill Clinton Tells GOP to Quit Arguing Against New Taxes...Right Before He Says We Shouldn't Have New Taxes

Bill Clinton's multiple personalities are quite active lately:

Former President Bill Clinton says now is not the time to hike taxes.

“I personally don’t believe we ought to be raising taxes or cutting spending, either one, until we get this economy off the ground,” Clinton told Newsmax in an interview on Tuesday. “This has been a dead flat economy.”...

Earlier this week, Clinton suggested that Republicans should stop arguing against Obama’s proposal to raise taxes on the rich.

“The Republicans in Washington always say the same thing,” Clinton said, accusing the GOP of being locked in to opposing ending the Bush-era tax cuts.

Could Bill be preparing the way for Hillary in 2012? Wouldn't surprise me at all.

Chicago Tribune: Obama Should Withdraw

How bad has it gotten when a hometown newspaper tells you to quit?

When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." For Barack Obama, it's more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.

His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work.

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, "it's going to be impossible for the president to win." Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: "Panic."

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

The piece goes on to make the case for...wait for it...Hillary Clinton. We're gonna see a lot more of that kind of talk if Obama's numbers don't significantly improve by year end.

The Most Popular Politician in America - Hillary Clinton

Heh:

The most popular national political figure in America today is one who was rejected by her own party three years ago: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans hold a favorable view of her and one-third are suffering a form of buyer’s remorse, saying the U.S. would be better off now if she had become president in 2008 instead of Barack Obama.

She's the only one who could save the day for the Democrats by challenging Obama in the primaries. I still think she might.

What If Obama Pulled an LBJ?

I was watching TV that night in 1968 when LBJ announced that he "would not seek, nor would he accept, the nomination" for another term for president.  It really shook things up, opening the door for Robert Kennedy, though he would be assassinated in Los Angeles in June of that year.

Some are thinking that Obama could be persuaded to pull an LBJ and clear the way for Hillary Clinton.  Allahpundit has some thoughts:

One-percent chance, minimum. Note that Fund's not talking about a primary challenge here; that would alienate black Democrats and the party would fracture before the general election, so it's not an option. The only way to dump him and hold the base together would be if he agreed to step down after Democratic chieftains privately appealed to him to do so. And if you believe this Gawker item from a few days ago, there's reason to think he might consider it. Supposedly The One is so demoralized by his political fortunes that people around him suspect he might be clinically depressed. If things are as bad as that, he might relish the chance to hand his re-election campaign off to someone else (and we all know who "someone else" is) and be rid of the frustration. You can imagine the announcement speech: "I've said many times that I'd rather be a good one-term president than a mediocre two-termer. I think I've achieved that in the passage of our landmark new health-care law and our many successes against Al Qaeda. But I promised you after I was sworn in that this economy would recover within three years and, for various reasons, that hasn't happened. Therefore, I'm announcing tonight . . ." etc. He goes out on a high note, he sets Hillary up for another historic presidency, and suddenly Democrats are on strong (or stronger) footing for the election -- especially given the Clinton legacy of economic boom times. In return, he gets basically whatever he wants from the party leadership. A guarantee, maybe, that he'll be appointed to the Supreme Court at the first available vacancy? Not the first time that idea's been floated.

I don't think Obama's ego would ever let him do something like this. For one thing, he still thinks he's doing a great job and is loved by the masses. Secondly, why would he want to sit by and watch Hillary Clinton get a hero's welcome?

Political Quote of the Day

From Democrat Ed Rendell:

“It’s going to be Hillary Clinton in 2016.”

Really? Does Hillary want to be 2016's version of Walter Mondale and lose 49 states to a very popular President Rick Perry?

Hillary Clinton is 63 years old (she'll be 64 in October).  On election day in 2016 she'll be 69 years old, and let's be honest, the years haven't been that good to her.  If she's going to make a serious run at the White House, 2012 is her last shot.  After that she's just the Democrat's Ron Paul.

I personally think she could knock Obama off in the primaries.  It would be a battle, but there's so much buyer's remorse in the Democrat party these days I don't see her losing.

But 2016 is out of the question.  As one Twitter wit put it, she'll look like Yoda then.  And the Force won't be with her.

Newsweek Calls for Obama's Resignation, Hillary Clinton's Election

Oh how far the mighty have fallen. William Broyles at Newsweek writes a particularly tough piece that calls Obama "America's Neville Chamberlain" and suggest he get out of the way and let Hillary Clinton have the 2012 nomination:

When Barack Obama was inaugurated, a Republican president had taken the peace, prosperity, and budget surpluses of the Clinton years and given us two wars, a devastated economy, and an almost trillion-dollar deficit. Obama was going to be our Franklin Roosevelt, our Winston Churchill—a visionary leader who would give America hope again. Instead, he has turned out to be the Neville Chamberlain of American politics, drifting toward national catastrophe, one compromise at a time.

In the 1930s, desperate to keep the peace, Chamberlain caved in to every German demand. And he got war anyway. Let me be clear: the right-wing radicals in control of the Republican Party of course are not Nazis. But Obama is like Chamberlain. A decent man who values peace and civility at any cost, he’s no match for his Republican adversaries.

In other words, Obama has failed because he was not ardently liberal enough.

The piece goes on for many more paragraphs with their Neville Chamberlain comparison, and then wraps up with this:

Americans aren’t inspired by well-meaning weakness. We like strong leaders, particularly in desperate times. FDR was trapped in a wheelchair and faced far greater challenges than Obama, yet he never gave the impression of being at the mercy of events. He set a course and followed it. He went out and got the votes he needed. So did Reagan. So did LBJ.

Chamberlain did one bold thing. He finally realized he was not the right man to lead Britain in dangerous times. He resigned so that Churchill could take over. There is one bold thing Obama could and should do. He should bow out of the race for reelection and throw his support behind Hillary Clinton—the leader we should have chosen in the first place.

Let me repeat the way I closed the Gallup poll post from yesterday:

Oh Hillary? Hillary? The Democrat Party turns its lonely eyes to you....

Political Quote of the Day

From James Taranto on Twitter:

@jamestaranto: If Mrs. Clinton were president, lefties would be urging Obama to challenge her in the primaries.

Yes they would.  There wouldn't even be a question of whether Hillary should be primaried if her performance was as bad as Obama's has been.

Is it too late for Hillary to get in?  Nope.  I think she could still pull the trigger any time before the end of the year.  And if Obama's presidency continues as it has so far, she just might.

Socialist Thinks Obama Needs a Primary Challenge From the Left

Me too:

After a nearly trillion-dollar federal stimulus, historic health care reform legislation and two confirmed liberal Supreme Court justices, one might think the American left would have to be somewhat satisfied with President Barack Obama, at least as a presidential nominee.

But Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is not. In an interview with liberal talker Thom Hartmann on Friday, Sanders spoke out very aggressively about the possibility of Obama facing a challenge from his left for the Democratic nomination.

“Well, at this point I have not,” Sanders said. “But I am now giving thought to doing it. You know, I think you know the names out there as well as I do. And I think the American people have got to be engaged. It’s not just me or anybody else here in Washington. There are a lot of smart honest progressive people who I think can be good presidents.”

Sanders said such a challenge was necessary since in his estimation, the president had begun to take his position as the party leader for granted.

“And I think one of the reasons President Obama has moved as far to the right as he has is he thinks he can go all the way and no one will stand up to him,” Sanders continued. “So, Tim I don’t want to tell you more than that but this is an issue I am – we are beginning to talk about a little bit.”

I'd love to see him get challenged in the primary, but I don't think pitting one socialist against another will have the desired effect. I still think Hilary Clinton could beat him if she tried.

Political Headline of the Day

From WOR Radio:

Former U.S. U.N. Ambassador John Bolton calls Hillary "an afterthought at the White House" says she is "nearly irrelevant."

Probably true, but she could become relevant again real quick if she'd decide to challenge Obama for the Dem nomination.

And I think she'd win, too.

Maybe Willie Brown Has Been Reading My Stuff

Willie Brown is the former Speaker of the California Assembly and former Mayor of San Francisco, and is considered somewhat of a political guru. He's making some news with a prediction that Joe Biden might be moved to Secretary of State to replace Hillary Clinton and make way for a younger VP with less baggage...something I suggested in January of 2010. Here's the Brown story:

Brown, who writes a well-read column for the San Francisco Examiner, was touching on widespread speculation that Vice President Joe Biden is not exactly an asset and might be dumped from his post by an increasingly nervous and poll-challenged President Obama when he declared:

“Here’s a prediction: Vice President Biden moves over to secretary of state, with New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo stepping in to bring new blood to the Obama re-election campaign.

“He’s a big name, a big-state governor. And a Democrat who is taking on the issue of pubic-employee salaries and pensions. Plus, he looks good,” Brown wrote.

A source close to Cuomo said the governor was flattered by Brown’s observations, “especially his saying that he looks good,” but insisted the governor had no plans other than to work hard during the 3½ years remaining in his term.

“The governor is committed to working for the people of New York and is not going anywhere,” said the source.

And here's what I wrote on January 5, 2010:

Should Obama and the Dems continue to slide, and especially if the Dems take a bloodbath in November, I look for Hillary to resign the Secretary of State's job sometime in early 2011. Nobody will believe she wants to "spend more time with her family" so she'll have to come up with another excuse. In reality, she'll be setting the table for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012.

And she'll be very popular. She barely lost the nomination in 2008 and given Obama's performance and her work as Secretary of State, her star probably shines brighter today than ever. For one thing, she hasn't been in the news all that much and we haven't had to listen to her. That's gotta help.

So, with Hillary out of the Secretary of State's office, who will Obama choose to replace her? Here's where the scenario becomes even more interesting - Joe Biden. Biden's many years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will be cited as the main reason to move him to SoS, though the real reason will have more to do with the fact that Biden will be a drag on the 2012 ticket. He's not seen as a viable future candidate for 2016 and frankly people are a little bit afraid that something will happen to Obama and we'll get stuck with President Biden.

This will give Obama and his political crew the opportunity to choose his potential successor, someone younger and more attractive as a 2016 candidate. Confirmation could be a bit problematic should the GOP pick up a bunch of Senate seats this year, but I don't know if they will have the stomach to filibuster a vice presidential nominee.

There's more at the post.

I don't think Cuomo would be a particularly good match for Obama. He's got some baggage of his own, and his presence on the ticket is not going to result in any electoral gains for Obama. Obama will win New York anyway, and having a New Yorker on the ticket could actually hurt in many parts of the country.

However, I do believe the Joe Biden to Secretary of State switch is very likely. Biden will not help Obama in 2012.

And I still think Hillary might be lurking out there to see if a 2012 challenge to Obama will be doable.

Even the Liberals Are Abandoning Obama

Rasmussen tells the story:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 19% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20 (see trends).

Today’s numbers reflect the lowest level of Strong Approval yet recorded for this president. There has been a sharp decline in enthusiasm among liberal voters.

Hillary, it's time for your 3am phone call...

Left Looking For a Challenger for Obama

But they're not getting any takers:

With President Obama officially running for re-election, the call from the left for a primary challenge was gaining steam - though no challenger so far is stepping forward.

Mr. Obama’s decision Monday to forgo civilian trials for the mastermind of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is only the latest in what liberal activists say is a long list of concerns they would like to see raised in a full campaign setting, which will only happen if someone challenges the president for the Democratic nomination.

The only purpose for a challenger from the left would be to try and push Obama in that direction, but it won't be a leftie that beats him. The only candidate who could win a nomination fight is Hillary Clinton, and she wouldn't be challenging him from the left. She'd be challenging him on the basis of competence.

What's Hillary Waiting For?

John Phillips at Top of the Ticket thinks Hillary Clinton should challenge Obama for the 2012 nomination:

If Hillary Clinton's primary voters and President Obama had their relationship status listed on their Facebook pages, it would change from “Married” to “It's complicated.”

To be fair, Hillary voters never fell in love with Obama, they just fell in line. Their relationship is less like a Julia Roberts chick flick and more like a Bengali arranged marriage.

Because of their arrangement, Hillary-loving Obama voters are quick to jump ship whenever Mr. Hope-and-Change looks like he's getting played again by his political opponents, is in over his head or is dissing their girl.

Despite Obama's anti-climactic campaign announcement just now, according to all the recent polls, Hillary voters aren't only jumping ship –- they're taking their fins, snorkels and pina coladas with them.

A new Quinnipiac University poll shows President Obama's approval rating at....

...a pathetic 42% –- down four points from early March. The American public isn't impressed with his handling of the crisis in Libya either -– with 47% of the public against the war and 58% of registered voters saying the president has not clearly stated U.S. goals for the mission.

These numbers are bad –- really bad –- CNN prime time ratings bad.

Read the rest of it here.

Frankly, I think she should run too, not because I want her to win the White House, but because I think she could knock him off in the primary and split the Dem party sufficiently enough to let a Republican win in November.  Realistically, this is probably the last election that Hillary will have a serious chance at the nomination.  She'll be too old and out of the public eye by 2016 (she's planning to leave her current job at the end of this term), and she'll never have a better chance to contrast herself with an opponent than she will in 2012.  There are a lot of Democrats out there that would like to fix their 2008 mistake.

My gut feeling is she won't run, and I really don't know what the reason will be.  But nothing would supercharge the election in 2012 more than a Hillary challenge.

Hillary - 66%

Could 2012 be knocking?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's favorable rating from Americans is now 66%, up from 61% in July 2010 and her highest rating to date while serving in the Obama administration. The current rating is just one percentage point below her all-time high rating of 67%, from December 1998.

With Obama at 42% approval rating in some polls, don't you think Hillary Clinton's 66% approval in Gallup might be making her rethink her 2012 plans?

Since Hillary has spent much of this administration hop-scotching around the globe the voters probably won't hold Obama's screw-ups against her.  The Dems may want to make up for their mistake in 2008.

People Who Shouldn't Run Against Obama in 2012

Sen. Marco Rubio has rejected a 2012 White House run with this statement:

“I want to be a United States senator. I want to be the best United States senator that Florida’s ever had ...I just got elected three months ago ...So how can I be a full-time

United States senator if my eye’s already on something else?"

Let me add some other names of people who should reject a 2012 run.  These are people whose names I see thrown about on Facebook and political blogs:

• Gov. Chris Christie (NJ) - too soon in the job. Give him a chance to straighten out New Jersey and he'll be a force in 2016.
• Gov. Scott Walker (WI) - see Chris Christie and swap New Jersey for Wisconsin
• Sen. Rand Paul (KY) - Again, too soon. Give him some time in the job.  I want to make sure he's sane first.
• Rep. Ron Paul (TX) - goes without saying.
• Sarah Palin - damaged goods. She can be far more effective in her current role as political analyst and speaker for conservative causes.  Could be a kingmaker in 2012.
• Michele Bachmann - Although a favorite of some Tea Partiers there's no sign that she would have any significant national following. I think her 2012 hints are more about gaining visibility for a Senate run than running for president.
• Herman Cain - former pizza company chairman and conservative speaker. No one knows who he is. Needs more time.
• Rep. Allen West - too new in the job.

Republicans shouldn't go after the latest flash-in-the-pan politician. Given them a chance to prove themselves first.

Yes, Democrats went after the latest fad and won, but they had a race card they could play and a media willing to join in the fawning. The GOP won't have any of that. We'll be running against an incumbent president, and although with Obama's record beating him in 2012 should be easy, we just don't seem to have the kind of presidential field we need. However, that's no reason to rush someone into the race before they're ready.

Oh, there is one Democrat who should run against Obama - Hillary Clinton.  I firmly believe she could win the nomination though the outcome in the general election is far from certain.

Hillary's About Had Enough

Being Secretary of State to the First Ditherer is a tough business and Hillary Clinton is looking for a way out:

Fed up with a president “who can’t make his mind up” as Libyan rebels are on the brink of defeat, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is looking to the exits.

At the tail end of her mission to bolster the Libyan opposition, which has suffered days of losses to Col. Moammar Gadhafi’s forces, Clinton announced that she’s done with Obama after 2012 — even if he wins again.

“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.”

He went on, “If you take a look at what’s on her plate as compared with what’s on the plates of previous Secretary of States — there’s more going on now at this particular moment, and it’s like playing sports with a bunch of amateurs. And she doesn’t have any power. She’s trying to do what she can to keep things from imploding.”

Clinton is said to be especially peeved with the president’s waffling over how to encourage the kinds of Arab uprisings that have recently toppled regimes in Egypt and Tunisia, and in particular his refusal to back a no-fly zone over Libya.

I'm surprised that Hillary is still in the job. Back in January of 2010 I wrote a piece that predicted that by now Hillary would have left the Secretary of State position and would be in the process of putting together a 2012 challenge to Obama. That's still possible, but Hillary has been vocal lately stating she's not interested in running for president again.

The kind of frustration she's experiencing can push a person in a couple of possible directions:   She could just quit and fade into history, or she could quit and answer the calls from some on the left who want her to run again.  There's still time for either option, though it's looking more like she'll just resign at the end of Obama's term.

Some Troubling Polls for Obama

Perhaps these Rasmussen polls explain why the White House has shifted from governing to campaigning:

Republicans hold a nine-point lead over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending March 13, 2011.

New Rasmussen Reports telephone polling finds that 46% of Likely U.S. Voters nationwide say they would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 37% would choose the Democrat instead. The gap is three points larger than it has been for the past two weeks.

We already know that Obama is willing to sacrifice congressmen to get his policies, so those numbers probably don't bother him.

 But these do:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 20% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -22. That is the president’s lowest rating since September (see trends).

Obama is facing his own tsunami. Expect lots of demagoguery and promises of rainbows and unicorns once again as he shifts to full campaign mode.

Personally, I can't believe that Hillary Clinton hasn't started a campaign to challenge him. She could win, and based on the GOP field I've seen so far, she could win it all.

And So It Begins...

This headline caught my eye:

REPORT: HILLARY STEPPING DOWN, RICHARDSON TAKING OVER STATE

If true, the Hillary 2012 campaign is about to get underway. Seems like I predicted something like that one year ago almost to the day. My guess was that Biden would go to State to clear the way for a better VP candidate for Obama in 2012, but there's still time to move Biden out of the way.