Posted on 06/19/2003 9:26:23 AM PDT by ken5050
Among the millions of words of pure unadulterated garbage written lately about all things Clintonian, it's very hard to find anything close to the truth, but in assessing Hillary's political strategy, as she pursues her goal of the WH in 2008, it is hard to come to any conclusion except that she will NOT run for re-election to the Senate in 2006, and there's a good chance that she might even resign from the Senate before that. So, for political insight that makes more sense than anything Dick Morris has every written, and better predictions than any astrologer, read on....
First, as a caveat, I should state that prior to 9/ll, I was firmly convinced that she was going to run in 2004. It made sense, but President Bush's popularity caused Hillary to abandon that strategy, and focus on 2008. Now, consider....
1. President Bush will win re-election by a near-landslide in 2004, and the GOP will increase its majority in the House, and might well add 5+ senators. The Dem party is going to be interrible shape, but above all, the day after election day 2004, the press is going to begin its focus on the 2008 election. We will finally be in the 4 year, 24/7 presidential election cycle.
2. At the same time that Hillary is asked about running in 2008...she'll also be asked about running for her Senate seat in 2006, and will she pledge to serve out her term? An uncomfortable question, at best, for her..
At the same time, youi'll start to hear a little grumbling among Dems that just perhaps Bill isn't the fair-haired boy of the Dems after all,( this after he holds a press conference to explain what the dems did wrong in the 2004 election.) and maybe a little more salacious news of Bill's meanderings starts to surface. It'll be harder for Hillary to maintain the sham that theirs is a marriage.
3. Being in the Senate minority isn't fun, and now Hillary will be in an even more visible position. If she runs in 2006..there's always a chance that someone like Rudy could decide to jump in against her, and a loss means she's finished. Even more likely, the GOP runs a much lesser candidate, but Hillary's negtives start to surface upstate, and she wins a modest victory. Against a no-name candidate, in a liberal Dem state like NY, that's an even greater sign of weakness. There would be a huge expectation of a big win. It would finish her.
If you look at if logically, she gains nothing from running for re-election, and can only lose something by doing so. So, as is the pattern for Hillary, she won't run, but..but..here's the but..she needs a reason.....and his name is B-I-L-L..
4. Hillary's always done best when she plays the sympathy card....the injured person..she's done it so many times, it's not necessary to reitierate them here, but look for Hillary to toss Bill out for philandering sometime in 2005....and remember, she actually laid the predicate for doing so at the end of her interview with Barbara Walters.
So, she'll need time to heal, to repair her personal life, ( go ahead, you can write the headlines ) and thus she'll announce that she won't run again in 2006. Indeed, if it polls well, she might even resign from the Senate before finishing out her term..to re-institute her "zone of privacy"...as she goes through the "painful" process of divorce.....and remember the added bonus of divorcing Bill..she won't have to include his financial info on all those presidential candidate disclosure forms, let alone file a joint tax return..
She'll escape any political hit from this, because with the GOP now holding a large majority in the Senate, the loss of her seat temporarily to the GOP..as Pataki appoints a Republican, won't matter....and NY State Dems will be thrilled, as several of them maneuver to try and take the seat in 2006...and of course, Chuckie Schumer will be OVERJOYED that Hillary is out of the Senate, so he'll no doubt be very supportive..
5. OK, so to recap...she's tossed out Bill fro screwing around, and resigned her Senate seat, all this sometime in 2005. The media circus is huge...all of which is good for Hillary. The drumbeat for 2008 swells...there's no one else on the Dem side, and all she needs to do is to start to "re-enter" public life, putting on a brave face to the world. And how best to do this, you ask?..why, that's easy....adopt a new role, the ultimate warm-fuzzy-image....the "mother of the bride"...that's right, boy's and girls....look for Chelsea to get engaged in 2005, with a June 2006 wedding....and Hillary throwing herself into the whirlwind of planning for it....imagine all the covers on Bride, People, et al, and of course the overarching question...how will she deal with Bill, the ex-president, ex-husband, at the wedding? I mean, when the bride's parents have their dance....can you just die?..and will Bill come stag, of bring his squeeze du-jour? It boggles the mind......go ahead, just think about it..
6. OK, now, after the 2006 elections are over, Hillary announces that in response to calls from people all over the country, and of her fellow Democrats begging here to rescue the party, she embarks on a nation-wide "listening tour" to see if she should seek the nomination....ad nauseum...and inevitable.
7. Of course, being Hillary, they'll have to be an added twist or two, to our plot, all designed to keep the public involved, enthralled, and engrossed with Hillary, all without focusing on her politics, but designed to maximize her symapthy factor. My two choices...and again, they seem obvious...
a. Will she drop the "Clinton" and revert back to Rodham?..Can you imagine the endless discussion on this alone? "The View" and "Oprah" will devote several shows to it...and heck, maybe an internet poll as well...
b. Hillary will of course need one, of more, suitable escorts to all the functions of the campaign...will she start dating?..who's suitable?....but again, the stories, the publicity...it's a flack's wet dream......and BTW, all of you who think Ted Turner..forget him...for two reasons...first he's way to poor now, thanks to collapse of AOL/TW, and besides, all those inevitable comparisons between Hillary and Jane Fonda....well, Leno would have a ball with that. Actually, it's pretty obvious....in 06, her new beaux will be the soon-to be ex-mayor of NYC, Mike Bloomberg.
First, he's got the bucks to support her lifestyle, and even finance her whole presidential campaign....and second..she'll get lots of props for bringing him back to the Democrat party.
OK....that's my take....but as you flame away, ask yourself, seriously, where I'm wrong in my logic...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.