Maybe it’s because I don’t participate in fantasy sports anymore; but lately I’ve been plotting a dream Democratic ticket for 2012 with Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s names scratched in favor of Hillary Clinton and a player to be named.
I know its sounds ludicrous and practically inconceivable, but before you laugh and dismiss me as living in a fantasy world-at least hear me out.
From my vantage point, by 2011, the Republicans will be in full swing, mounting an aggressive presidential campaign against President Obama and charging him with failing to pull the United States out of one of the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Even under the rosiest of predictions, the unemployment rate will still be hovering around eight to nine percent, dire enough to cause the Democrats plenty of problems in 2012.
Even with all the feathers in his cap, and let’s be clear, Obama has had plenty of legislative victories: from health care to financial reform to credit card reform, but let’s also be honest-Mr. Obama’s will be remembered most for his inability to get some 15 million workers back to work.
And while it’s usually not recommended to ``swap horses in midstream’’ (Abraham Lincoln’s 1864 campaign slogan), I still believe the time will be ripe for Hillary Clinton, make that former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, to launch a coup d'état and take the Democratic nomination away from her former boss.
The argument against such a move is obvious. Hillary would be accused of dismantling the unity of the party and giving some added momentum to the Republicans, much like Jimmy Carter was weakened by his bruising battle with Ted Kennedy in 1980 that kept him a one-term president.
I argue the circumstances are a bit different since 1980; and though Hillary would initially be considered a divider not a uniter, in the long run when the dust settles; and old wounds are patched up–the party will be in a much stronger position to ensure another Democrat remains in the White House in 2012.
Hillary’s motive for throwing her hat in the ring and usurping a fellow party member will be predicated on her desire to address the needs of the Democratic base that was sorely neglected by the previous administration: especially a large slice of the middle class; and the important DDD’s (Dunkin Donut Democrats, those making $50,000 or less) who were hit hard by the Great Recession and are looking for an alternative to Obama’s economic mishandling.
Just consider what Hillary would bring to the table in 2012: More foreign policy experience than either Obama or whoever the Republicans throw in the ring; she would attract a wide swath of independent voters and Republicans who voted for Obama and have grown disillusioned with his administration, but still are not ready to embrace the Tea Party movement or fringe Republican ideologues like Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich.
If a frustrated voting population, including millions of unemployed workers, were given the choice of putting Obama back in the White House for another dicey four years; or alternatively, lending their ears to the Republican message-voters might very will throw their weight behind the Republican nominee in 2012 -if for no other reason than knowing since Obama failed them-how much worse can a Republican president be?
But if Hillary were the nominee; independents and a growing and mighty female voting bloc would at least have an alternative to a disappointing four years under Obama; and better still, have an alternative to whoever the Republicans have to offer.
As I see it, Hillary will be out of the Obama administration sooner than anyone thinks. If she’s able to broker a historic Middle East agreement; that will be her golden opportunity to head for the exit, having accomplished what no man before her has: mediated a constructive peace agreement in the Middle East, which would be the capstone to her international diplomacy portfolio.
Hillary would then be able to attack Obama from two areas where he is the weakest: the economy and foreign policy. Obama botched the economy; while he dragged us in another quagmire in Afghanistan, while Clinton, not Obama, showed her grit with leaders in Iran and brokering a Middle East peace agreement. Clinton would additionally be able roll out her domestic agenda, while chiding Obama for not going far enough with the stimulus spending, including his failure to advance an infrastructure projects in producing technologies of the future in order to keep pace with a burgeoning China.
As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently said on ABC ‘s ``This Week’’ roundtable, Obama’s biggest failure was in not formulating a Marshall Plan for his domestic agenda ; as far as outlining a comprehensive education plan that will turn out graduates with specialties in growing industries, developing new technologies for the future, energy conservation programs, infrastructure projects, etc.etc
Hillary’s strongest base has always been the blue-collar, shot- and-a- beer, Dunkin Donut voters; the very constituency hit the hardest in the Great Recession; and are on the verge of drifting under the Republican column.
Far from being perceived as an ingrate or a turncoat; if Hillary challenges Obama for the 2012 nomination and wins, she might spark new life into a moribund party in the 2012 general election that was otherwise on the fast track to oblivion with Obama as their conductor.
Thanks for hearing me out.
-Bill Lucey
[email protected]
Comments