Still pushing Hillary in 2016 -- and I'm not alone

By Richard K. Barry

In my own small way, I have been pushing the idea of Hillary Clinton running for president in 2016. I think she'd be great, and apparently I have company.

What does the list of encouragers look like, in no particular order?

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi recently told Charlie Rose on PBS that, "Yes, that would be so exciting."

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has said that she would be "one of the first" to ask Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to run for president in 2016, and, if you can believe it, Donald Trump has even said positive things about the possibility. Go figure.

Most intriguing, though, is the comment by Bill Clinton that he would be "happy" if Hillary sought the presidency, though he is sticking to the script that he doesn't think she will. As he told Good Morning America:

I believe that she's being absolutely honest with you when she says she doesn't think she'll go back into politics. But if she comes home and we do this foundation stuff for the rest of our lives, I'll be happy; if she changes her mind and decides to run, I'll be happy.

I think that comment speaks volumes. It says to me that Bill knows his wife and knows that when the time comes she will be very tempted to get back into politics.

For her part, Hillary has been saying things like, "It's flattering, but, you know, I'm not planning to do that," adding that she has no "desire or intention" to run again for the White House.

Of course, even a casual observer would realize that these are non-denial denials. All they suggest is that someone else in her party currently has the job and is running for re-election and that it would be highly inappropriate for her to create unwanted background noise. We get that. 

I'm not saying she will do it. I don't think she would risk a high-stakes run in which there were difficult odds against success. But if things align in any reasonable fashion, I don't see how she could say no. 

In my humble opinion, her kind of political talent comes around rarely, and it would be foolish for the Democratic Party not to encourage any aspirations she might have.


(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

The best laid plans of mice

By Carl 

People over a certain age, say twenty, will recall the last time a GOP Congress tried to hold a presidency hostage.

Clearly, overtones of that debacle shadowed Republican obstructionism all year, but as I predicted early on (can't be arsed to do the search, I'm guessing it was late February,) sooner or later events were going to catch up with Weaker Boehner and his faction. The split in the Republican party was too deep for the usual "marching orders" to have much effect.

In the 1995-1996 shut down, the signature moment, when the Republican Congress became the hated enemy and lost the political ground they slowly earned in the 1994 election as well as any moral authority with the Clinton administration, came during a trip to Israel aboard Air Force One for the funeral of Yitzhak Rabin. Newt Gingrich lambasted the president on the record for not taking the opportunity to discuss the budget impact and for making Gingrich exit through the back door of the plane (like every other Congressional leader before and since).

Any negative impact the shutdown had on Clinton's poll numbers immediately shifted to Gingrich and he lost the battle and the war. 

Weaker Boehner has been particularly circumspect when it comes to overt signals like that, and avoiding a shut down in the first place (something that would have angered his constituency more than a small tax hike on the rich, I suspect).

Until now. By walking away from a tax cut, albeit a stop-gap cut designed to allow Congress to head home for the holidays but more important, to give hope to the working people of America, Weaker Boehner has committed the unpardonable sin of not only raising taxes, but taking away a tax cut he himself opposed in the first place, but eventually acceded was a good idea.

Meaning, he's going to get blamed for this failure. Correctly, in my view. It's disingenuous to first oppose, then grudgingly support, then steal back a tax cut, particularly in an era when real Americans are watching every penny. Now he'll have to pass the original tax cut Obama proposed extending (one year) which he vehemently opposed in favor of the two-month stop gap, which he was okay with then, but not now. 

$40 a week matters to people who live paycheck to paycheck and that sadly has become the norm in the American middle and especially working classes. It's a day or two worth of food. It's bus fare for a month. It's a tutor for a child struggling with algebra. It's gas for the car.

Boehner's shortsightedness looks like it may finally have driven a stake deep into the heart of the undead party that is the GOP, as well. He will have to continue to placate the Eric Cantor batwing, while explaining to the Senate Republican caucus, which backed this extension by 83% to 17%, how he could sell them out so readily.

There's a woodshed on the back of which his name is emblazoned, methinks.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)