Posted on 10/01/2005 6:22:32 PM PDT by FairOpinion
FOR countless Democrats around America, the announcement last week of a new initiative linking Senator Hillary Clinton to one of her party’s most appealing new stars amounted to a match made in political heaven.
Not since President George W Bush crushed the Democratic party’s hopes in last November’s election have two senators with perhaps the strongest chances of beating Republican rivals to the White House formed such an intriguing alliance.
Clinton has been linked with Senator Barack Obama, the charismatic black Democrat from Illinois, in a healthcare initiative that unites two formidable and ambitious politicians who have their eyes on making US presidential history.
The details of the senators’ health proposals were in danger of being swamped last week by renewed speculation about how long America might have to wait for either its first woman or first black president.
“This is a powerful partnership,” noted Norman Ornstein, a political specialist at the American Enterprise Institute, one of Washington’s most influential think tanks.
Obama’s emergence as a popular national figure has helped fuel optimism in Democratic ranks that the Republicans will not recover from a recent series of crushing setbacks — including widespread criticisms of the government’s hurricane-relief actions, the criminal indictment of one of the party’s leaders on Capitol Hill and Bush’s continuing problems over Iraq.
Ever since he burst onto the political scene with a spellbinding speech to the Democratic convention last year, Obama, the 44-year-old son of a black Kenyan father and white American mother, has been tipped for the highest office. His autobiography, Dreams from My Father, was on bestseller lists for more than a year.
He comfortably won his 2004 Illinois Senate race but, taking a leaf from Clinton’s book, adopted a low profile as a novice senator during his early months in Washington. He spent most of his time cultivating Illinois contacts and working quietly in a junior role on several Senate committees.
All that changed when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. Appalled by what he described as America’s “historical indifference” to the plight of poor black people, Obama accused government planners of being “detached from the realities of inner-city life in New Orleans”, saying the Bush administration “simply doesn’t recognise what’s happening in large parts of the country”.
On one visit to affected areas he appeared at a press conference given by former presidents George Bush Sr and Bill Clinton, and was spotted chatting to Hillary.
Although the two had often crossed paths in Senate corridors, Obama had previously made clear to reporters that he was not seeking the kind of leadership role Clinton now fills in her party.
“What Senator Clinton did when she first came in was what any person would do when they come into a new environment, that is listen and learn before you speak and you act,” Obama recently told Time magazine. “I have tried to follow that same wisdom.”
Yet Katrina inspired a change of heart and within days Obama was giving his first nationally televised interviews. A tall, glamorous figure with a mesmerising speaking style, he has since popped up in public frequently and joined Clinton in voting against John Roberts as Bush’s choice for the new chief justice of the US Supreme Court.
For Clinton, Obama’s emergence represents both an opportunity and a potential longer-term threat. For much of the past five years she has been building bridges to the communities she needs for a successful White House run in 2008.
She has devoted herself to security issues and forged a strong relationship with the military. She has softened her stance on abortion, emphasising the human agonies involved, and worked hard to shed her reputation as a bruising ideologue by co-operating with Republican senators on a range of issues. She has backed Bush on keeping US troops in Iraq.
Yet Obama’s support — and his presumed influence with blacks and other poor immigrant communities — could be critical to Clinton’s success. Not the least of Senator John Kerry’s problems against Bush last year was his failure to mobilise black voters who traditionally support the Democrats.
So it was not just doctors’ eyebrows that were raised when Clinton and Obama announced last week they were working together to find a solution to America’s medical malpractice crisis.
So many lawsuits are filed against doctors that the cost of malpractice insurance is driving many of them out of business.
Ornstein noted that the announcement was likely to fan speculation about Obama’s vice-presidential prospects. “He’s got national candidacy written all over him,” he said.
Few Democrats believe America is ready for a presidential ticket comprising a woman with a black running mate — at least not in 2008. “That’s too much history all at once,” one party strategist said.
Yet there are signs that Obama is positioning himself to inherit Clinton’s mantle as the next great Democratic presidential hope should the New York senator slip in her Senate re-election campaign next year — or otherwise fall from the reckoning.
When Katrina struck, Obama was out of the country on his first foreign trip as a senator to inspect disarmament projects in Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan. On his way home he passed through London and paid a brief visit to No 10 and a meeting with Tony Blair.
“They let me sit in Winston Churchill’s reading chair,” he proudly told reporters later. One day visitors may be told it was also the chair used by President Obama.
1) At some point in time Hillary is going to have to decide if she is going to run for President. All of us believe there is absolutely no doubt Hillary will run for the Presidency in 2008. What will the impact on Hillary's Senate run be if she announces her intention to run for the presidency during her Senate campaign? What will the impact on Hillary's run for President be if she announces during her Senate run her attention to serve a full term but reneges on that promise?
2) What if Hillary wins the Senate race but falls far short of her predicted margin of victory expectations? A close race in New York, an extremely liberal state, means Hillary has huge problems in a national election. It seems far more logical for Hillary to announce her intention to seek the presidency in 2006 as a reason for foregoing the Senate run.
3) If Hillary were to lose her Senate seat, no matter how slim the possibility, 2008 is over.
4) What will happen if Hillary decides not to run and a Republican wins the US Senate race in NY?
5) Running for the Presidency as a Senator is almost an impossible approach for winning. Hillary as a Senator will have a Senate voting record to defend. She will not only have to defend that voting record against Republicans but also against Democrats. Why not let the opposition (mostly Senators from both parties at this point) have records to defend while you concentrate full time on your presidential campaign a year before anyone else and not have a Senate record to defend later?
6) What if the Republicans increase their majority in the Senate in 2006? What is the value of remaining in the Senate for Hillary or any other Democrat seeking the Presidency if this happens? IMHO a Hillary Senate run is not a sure thing.
1) Not a reason.
2) Pure cowardice, and what a way to deflate enthusiasm for you.
3) Rather irrelevant. If she can't win the Senate in '06 then she never had a hope of winning the presidency anyway. Ducking the race will just postpone and magnify the inevitable humiliating defeat.
4) Don't see the "reason" here.
5) Another two years of Senate votes can't add much ammunition if she's smart about it. It can also do good, again if you're smart about it.
6) Don't really see much of a reason here either. If being in the minority was that bad 15 people would quit every election year, wouldn't they?
I can't imagine a female on one part of the ticket (a first) and a black on the other part of the ticket (a first) and both liberals. The public has to be convinced that one of them (the one at the top of the ticket) has the cajones to defend the country. I say it never happens.
He has already admitted that parts of his biography are fiction. How do you elect someone who lies in their published biography?
Okay. Let's see what happens.
Unfortunately, the Chicago elitists basically run all of IL. Pubbies have no representation in the IL House or Senate. It's sad really.
Never seems to be any viable Republican candidates. We can thank that turd George Ryan for destroying the trust in the Republican party in IL.
Was it Jim Ryan and that whole thing with the wife?
Bill would not take second fiddle to Hill.
He was last sighted in 1920. Still breathing fire. Perhaps an early fan of Dubya.
4) What will happen if Hillary decides not to run and a Republican wins the US Senate race in NY?
Hell will freeze over when the free thinkers in NYC vote in a Republican. It's a lost cause.
I have just 2 words for u, Rudy Giuliani.
I have just 2 words for u, Rudy Giuliani
And three back at you, He's Pro Choice.
And 6 back at u, So is Hillary. It's New York!
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.