Democrats have a BIG Hillary problem.
Hillary Clinton. The very mention of her name divides people. They either love her or they hate her, and they do so with equal passion. Ever since she first stepped into the Senate over 6 years ago, it was the worst kept secret in the political world that Hillary Clinton burned with a desire to be president, and now here we are in 2007 with Mrs. Clinton as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. Not only is she out front, but if the polls are to be believed, she could have a vice grip on the Democratic nomination as soon as the end of February 2008. However, it seems that most Democrats have not stopped to ask themselves is nominating Hillary Clinton a good idea? The crux of the Clinton campaign argument is that she can win in the November and bring the White House back to the Democrats, but wasn’t this the exact same reason John Kerry was nominate in 2004? Even more so, isn’t every nominee expected to win?
The reality which the Clinton campaign smartly avoids is that a Hillary nomination makes the task of winning the White House much tougher than if any of the other less polarizing Democrats were to be selected, because Hillary Clinton will never be popular. (She has the warmth and personality of Al Gore and John Kerry. She doesn’t even have an experienced public record to run on, and no, being First Lady does not count as experience. America didn’t choose her for the job. She was part of the package that America did elect, her husband Bill). All of her shortcomings could be easily overcome if she would take clear stands on the issues, and truly lead, but she has chosen to run a campaign where she says a little as possible about the issues. Vagueness and generalities are the marks of the Clinton campaign so far.
The other big problem for Hillary is the war in Iraq. No one who has studied her record now believes that she is against this war for any other reason than this is what a majority of Democrats want. When the war was popular, Hillary was pro-war, but now that it isn’t she has hopped on the get the troops out bandwagon. If what I have written is true, then why is Hillary Clinton winning? She is winning because she and her husband are the most powerful force in the Democratic Party. For example, who stands to benefit most from a frontloaded primary system that emphasizes name recognition and the ability to spend money to advertise over grass roots campaigning? There is only one candidate in the Democratic field who fits this description, and that is Hillary Clinton. A frontloaded campaign allows the Clinton team a chance to hide her weaknesses, and market their candidate through advertising as a woman and a winner.
In short, the Democratic leadership is railroading much of the Party’s base into voting for Clinton. The deck is really being stacked against an Obama or Edwards. The Democratic Party establishment wants Hillary Clinton to win. They don’t want her to be seriously challenged. They want their nominee selected early and to emerge relatively unscathed from the primary process. Barack Obama thus far has been a good party solider and refrained from pointing out Mrs. Clinton’s obvious flaws. John Edwards has been critical of Clinton, but with each passing week, his chances of winning the Democratic nomination appear to grow more remote. So besides her obvious shortcomings in the personality, experience, vision, and popularity areas what else is wrong with her?
