The Fall of the House of Clinton

[KukriKhan]

2016: Chelsea.

There's more to this than meets the eye, say I. In my uninformed, ignorant opinion, bubba Bill lost Hil the job. And: on purpose, I think (even if only subliminally).

In the beginning (way back in '07, when folks were announcing), she had it money-wise, vote-wise, media-saturation coverage-wise. Everytime she 'spiked' Bill made a faux pas, and that spike turned into a crevasse.

In my heart, I think her candidacy was intended to be a payback for his bad treatment of her during his POTUS time; "hush money" if you will. "You 'stand by your man' now, and I'll support you getting the job next."

So they played the game the way it was played in the early 90's, which worked for Billie Boy then (much to their surprise, I think), but didn't resonate with today's voters or king-makers. So they got sucker-punched, thinking they were running against Reagan/Bush I, when thay were actually running against a different tide in american public opinion.

Assuming I live to see it, I won't be surprised to see a Chelsea-as-Marianne campaign in '16: saviouress of 'the american ideal', inspirational-leader-of-the-common-man, fearless defender of 'the american way'.

Would Hil have been a better POTUS than Barry or Johnny? In my opinion: no. She'd be the same. The office changes the candidate, once they are confronted with the realities of the job. You see it after about 9 months to a year in office. They all come 'round to realpolitik, and actually try to steer a course that, if not advancing the nation, at least doesn't make it deadhead.

Except for our incumbant.

[Lemur]

So they got sucker-punched, thinking they were running against Reagan/Bush I, when thay were actually running against a different tide in american public opinion.

I don't think either Hillary or Bill understood just how sick of President Bush the majority of the country (not to mention primary voters) had become. They weren't running against Reagan/Bush, they were running against the Carter to end all Carters, as one blogger eloquently put it:

Imagine that Bush is a Democrat (not that hard when you consider his fiscal record). Now imagine that a Democratic president had presided over the worst attack on American soil in history, a far stronger Iran on the brink of nukes, and a resurgent, aggressive Russia, willing and able to invade and terrorize a neighboring country in part because the president long believed that its president was a good man, and had looked into his soul.

I think they would have impeached him a few years ago, no? He would be viewed as the Carter to end all Carters.