Posted on 09/20/2005 8:50:23 PM PDT by Jean S
Former President Bill Clinton’s thesis, articulated on “Meet the Press,” is that “large” figures in their parties who are elected to lesser offices should not be asked to commit to serving out their full terms so that when duty calls they are free to answer.
It’s advice he failed to heed for himself when he was governor of Arkansas. Then he just resorted to his frequent M.O. and lied, telling the voters that he was going to serve out his full term when he had no real intention of doing so — if he could help it.
But Arkansas is not New York, and the relatively unknown Bill Clinton of 1990 is not the Hillary Clinton of 2005. Hillary must come squarely face to face with an unpleasant fact: If she won’t commit to serving a full term in the Senate, she may not win reelection to the seat.
At first, it looked as if she could skate by without a full commitment since she faced relatively weak opposition. Ed Cox, Nixon’s son-in-law, and John Spencer, former Yonkers mayor, were not the sort to confront Hillary with a potent challenge. But now that Jeanine Pirro has declared her candidacy, Hillary has a real fight on her hands.
Since Pirro is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-affirmative action, pro-gay civil unions and pro-immigration, Hillary cannot use any of her trusty hot-button issues to dismiss her. And, as a woman, Pirro is in an excellent position to challenge Hillary on all of her core issues.
Already, since Pirro announced — and despite her embarrassing 32 seconds of silence while she groped for her speech text — the Westchester Republican, a district attorney, has closed the gap with Hillary. The Democratic senator led Pirro by a gigantic 30-point margin, 61-31 percent, before Jeanine announced. But afterward Pirro trailed by only 55-34.
Most senators can escape having to declare that they will serve out a full term. But Hillary can’t because of the unique way she came to New York state. Had the first lady decided to run for senator in Delaware or Indiana or some such state, voters would have assumed she just moved in to run. But she moved to New York state and assured us all that she was vindicating a lifelong dream to move to the Big Apple. So many people have done so, and New Yorkers’ egos are such that they believed that Hillary had just felt the same magic gravitational pull the city seems to exert on people.
But now she is using New York state as a steppingstone. As Pirro said in her announcement (the part of the text she could find), “Hillary asked us to put out the welcome mat and we did so. But now she wants us to become a doormat and that we will never do.”
Polls show that 60 percent of New Yorkers do not want Hillary to run for president even as 55 percent say they will vote for her for the Senate. They know that a senator is AWOL when she goes for the top prize.
Neither Kerry nor Lieberman nor Gephardt nor Edwards was seen much around the Capitol when their candidacies beckoned. Despite good attendance records beforehand, they rarely showed up for votes. As a presidential candidate, Hillary will be off in Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida and other states rather than in New York or Washington working for the people she was elected to represent. It’s just the nature of things.
Armed with the doubts of New Yorkers about Hillary’s fealty and protected by her social liberalism, Pirro will make a very effective challenger. She will almost certainly make the race closer than the 12 points that separated Hillary from her 2000 Republican challenger, Rep. Rick Lazio. And Pirro will make her work hard and spend tens of millions of dollars.
And she might just beat Hillary. Which raises the question: Why is Hillary running for reelection to a job she wants to leave? New Yorkers will all be asking, so Hillary might want to ask herself.
Morris is the author of Rewriting History, a rebuttal of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) memoir, Living History.
And he's been right, how many times?
Bull Shit!
If Hillary runs again, the voters of New York will re-elect her.
"Which raises the question: Why is Hillary running for reelection to a job she wants to leave?"
She wants her hand in the till just as long as she can. You can see from the China she stole from the White House, this girl is into "things".
They voted for her. They'll vote for her again. They deserve her.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Well, he got Clinton elected as President. He was right at least once. and it was a biggy.
Agreed. New York loves to be dazzled by bullshit and prefers politicians to exist to re-inforce their liberal elitist mindset.
The NY Times will back Hillary every step of the way.
Wait'll the hildebeest breaks wind (oops, gets wind) of this. Let the household missiles fly. "Large figures", indeed. I wonder if he meant her hips?
And Pirro is a Republican because...?
Hell, I'm still trying to untangle myself from trying to figure out their endorsement of her in 2000. A combination of pretzel logic and oral flatulence like one has never seen...
"Since Pirro is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-affirmative action, pro-gay civil unions and pro-immigration"
What?? And why are conservatives excited about this woman running? She's just another RINO.
[Since Pirro is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-affirmative action, pro-gay civil unions and pro-immigration...]
"And Pirro is a Republican because...?"
Good question. I wish more people would ask Rudy G. the same question. He has the same positions as Pirro.
Pirro CAN win. But, what's the saying?
It's hers to lose? Well, in this case it's Pirro's to win. Slight different take on the cliche.
First she has to deal with the folks that are upset that a Republican Liberal on some issues, conservative on others like economics, national defense and school choice, could actually win and have decided they want to take her down for some assinine reasoning. Maybe I'd take them seriously if they had ousted Bloomberg, a DEMOCRAT, from the Republican Party which, imo, is a DISGRACE on their ends that he is allowed to use the Party being a REAL "D". But, no, they'd rather target someone that could win an would actually not join a filibuster on judges. Go Figure about their motives.
If she can do that convincing, it ups her chances.
Then there is the tough part. Selling herself to the Libs that don't like Hillary, and that's most of them, while convincingly reassuring she'll represent New Yorkers interest. While socially Liberal, New Yorkers do care about things like school choice and tax cuts, same as the average person. She has to breach the trust gap.
But, yes, she can win, but unlike Morris I won't pretend it easy. It won't be. It'll take hard work on her part. It's up to her to pull it off and I wish her well.
Everytime he opens his mouth, BJ lessens his wife's chances. Notice him moving to the left when she's trying to pass herself off as a moderate? What a couple..And since the Bush family has been so nice to him, do you think everytime he pulls this, he doesn't signal to people that these are the most classless people one can imagine.
Well, maybe if John Kennedy, Jr. lived she may not have been endorsed. The rumor was he was planning on running for senator of NY when his plane went down in Fort Marcy Park or was it off the coast of Mass. - can't remember.
Pirro in a debate w/the hilderbeast should be very interesting. Pirro is smart and sassy.
Hilderbeast just has dirty tricks and FBI files going for her. I'm sure her staff already has the sholves out and the spin machine is being oiled.
A complete non-issue for most New Yorkers. They want a Rat in the Senate. Whether it's Hillary for six years or just two is secondary. Morris is often right, but here he's wrong.
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.