Report from Chappaqua: Hillary in 2004!!

And of course, there's always the Dick Moris factor. He's written several pieces recently telling us that she's going to run in 2008, not 2004. Dick's "record" alone as a failed prognosticator should be conclusive proof of my thesis. I mean, he's actually told us that Chelsea will one day be a candidate. And if two national political magazines can have cover stories calling for the Dems to nominate John McCain, well, it's time for some logic, rather than fantasy, in political prognostication. But I will detail my thoughts and observations for your consideration. And I'll offer a surprise scenario at the end of this article.

Your faithful correspondent had an up-close opportunity to observe my junior Senator this past Memorial day, when she delivered a few banal remarks at Chappaqua's annual observance. I was 20 or so feet from her as she spoke, and got a chance to study her closely. It's not a question of whether or not one considers her attractive ( she's not!). What's obvious are two things: First, she's tired. Not the "tired" borne of fatigue, but rather of stress. Obviously the wheels have been turning 24 hours non-stop for some time, trying to decide. It's taking a toll, and she might keep it up for another 6 months, but not for another 6 years.

Hillary is one of those women that becomes much less attractive in middle age. Indeed, she is not aging gracefully, and the current and future, media images will not be kind to her. Modern political campaigns are all about visual imagery, and Hillary may be morphing into a slightly taller version of Senator Mikulski. It will NOT play well in 2008. "Maude" as the first Madame President? Unlikely.

The Israelis may have embraced Golda Meier, but the US electorate will not. "Frump" won't cut it. Image is nearly everything in politics these days. Just compare the Vanity Fair cover from a few years ago, with ANY recent pics of Hillary, and the point is self-evident. Talk about your "reverse' make -over. Now, mentally fast forward to an image of Hillary in 2008. Enough said.

Author's note: If any Freeper can post the Vanity Fair cover, side-by-side with a recent pic of Hillary, it would be appreciated.

And that's a crucial factor, the "look", because the stresses of a national campaign would be a real strain on her. She wasn't a great candidate during her carefully orchestrated senatorial campaign, and to think that she could stand the pressure of a long primary season, and THEN a national campaign, in 2008, is to beg credulity.

Before 9/11, I was absolutely convinced that she was running in 2004. It made sense. Bush looked very vulnerable, and she and Bill controlled much of the Dem party apparatus and fund-raising capability. She could have had the nomination for the asking.

Post 9/ll, of course, we're in a different political universe. The president looks unbeatable, so why run an inevitably losing race? After all, if she lost in 2004, she'd never have another chance in 2008. And that, sadly for her, is Hillary's dilemma. Consider the possible scenarios:

1. She doesn't run. Another Dem wins the nomination, and then wins the election. Hillary is finished. She'd never have another chance. Hillary in 2012? NO WAY!!

2. More likely. She doesn't run. Another Dem ( pick one, ANY one?) wins the nomination, but loses to President Bush. The 2008 presidential race begins the day AFTER Election Day 2004. We will indeed see the first four year presidential election cycle. And since the GOP slot will be "open" the interest in the Dem nomination will be more intense, because the Presidency will be perceived as winnable in 2008.

Look, the idea that a slew of Dem presidential wannabes are going to do nothing for 4 years; just sit around, twiddle their thumbs, and concede Hillary the 2008 nomination is just plain laughable. It ain't gonna happen. They're going to fight her for it tooth and nail, contesting every delegate and every fund raising dollar. She'd be campaigning every day, non-stop, for the next four years. Hardly an enjoyable prospect for her to contemplate. And then, if she wins the nomination, she'd have to face the rigors of the national campaign.

I can't see Hillary looking at this scenario and finding it attractive. Nope, it's 2004 or never.

And there's also the Bubba factor. Bill is publicly behaving himself, keeping his pants on. But he wont' do so for six more years. No, she can only keep him on a "short leash" for a little while longer.

Thus, her choice is simple. To run, and likely lose to President Bush, but..."hey, who knows what might happend. I mean, Bill DID win, twice, after all"....or NOT run, and give up any hope of ever again sitting in the Oval office....When you look at it like that, it's pretty much cut and dried. She's running. And hope for a miracle in the general election. I mean, Bill won, TWICE, so miracles can happen.

And she can have the nomination fairly easily. Indeed, have it handed to her. Be annointed, so to speak. After all, the current crop of Dem "pretenders" hasn't generated any buzz. In every poll of Democrat voters, the "not-running" Hillary runs a strong second behind Gore,a nd it would be a piece of cake to marginalize Gore right now, because the overwhelming majority of Dem officials don't want him to run again. And she coiuld lock up most of the major contributors with a few phone calls.

So, what's the time table? Given the heavily front loaded Dem primaries, Hillary will have to announce soon after the 2002 election. Indeed, all the Dems are marking time until then, though some are more "unannounced" than others. Ironically though, hoped-for GOP successes in this fall's Senate races might just be the answer to Hillary's one stumbling block, her publicly stated pledge to serve out her Senate term.

Assume, as I think is likely, the GOP regains the senate in November, probably with a two seat or more majority. Remember, if the US does move on Iraq, and remove Sadam this fall, President Bush's popularity will be in the 90% range, and he might well have the political legs to propel several Republicans to Senate seats. So now, the Dems are back in the minority in the Senate, hardly something to look forward to, and no doubt the GOP Senate leadership will be ready for for lots of hardball payback.

So, here it is. Look for Hillary to announce at the end of this year, that she is resigning her senate seat to devote every fiber of her being to seek the 2004 Democrat nomination for the Presidency. It's the perfect solution. It looks very principled, and can be played and presented as noble self-sacrifice. It gets her out of the pledge to serve out her Senate term without going through another charade of a "listening tour". It keeps her out of having to serve in the dsenate minority. Hillary's doing this for us. It's enough to make you cry.

And along the way, for the softer, gentler side of Hillary, the human touch, look for Hillary to announce Chelsea's engagement early next year, with the attendant media circus. And of course, the happy couply will delay setting a wedding date, because, well....Chelsea would just love a White House wedding......It's enough to make you gag.

As an aside, I'll climb further out on a limb with a bonus prediction. After Hillary resings her senate seat,look for newly re-elected Gov. Pataki, who's cruising to victory, to resign as Governor, and have himself appointed to the Senate. This very cynical maneuver will deflect any criticism of the self-serving nature of hillary's resignation. She'll look like Joan of Arc, sacrificing all to save the country..... It's enough to make you really gag.

And another tidbit of proof, for the devil is really in the details. The Clintons are doing a TON of work to the Chappaqua manse, the residence of record. Every day, there's a slew of activity, trucks, trailers. It's been ongoing for months. So, why, you ask?....It doesn't really make sense, since neither of them is hardly eever there. I mean, let's face it, Chappaqua is nice, but it cramps their style, it's so NOT them. But, there are a number of possibilities that suggest themselves:

1. Building a vault in the basement for all the ill-gotten gains of the last decade.

2. Building a cage for Bill.

Safety-proofing the house for the new dog. I mean, look at how many Americans own pets. If the Clintons kill another one, it won't well, poll well. I mean, if we can't trust you with a puppy, can we trust you with the country?

Or, as is most likely, they're making the house presidential campaign-ready, with considerable security improvements, and a passel of other cosmetic changes, for the multitude of magazine spreads and TV interviews "at home", so to speak, with the candidate. After all, when she resigns her senate seat, she'll move "back home" to Chappaqua, to commence her idealistic, and lonely quest for the Presidency. And she'll have to give up her tax-payer financed offices. So, get ready for lots of "Hillary in the garden". "Hillary in her den". The family kitchen. "Hillary whipping up a salad for the loyal staff working out of a basement HQ." Look for Chelsea to move back "home" to work on her mom's campaign.

It's enough to make you really, really gag.

As always.... for your consideration, comments, and hopefully, enjoyment.

My friend, as far as the Hildebeast's appearance goes, she has shown a definite willingness to morph when politically expedient.

Could be, but I would not put much credence in the too tired, too stressed reasoning. There is nothing - I mean nothing - that the Clintons will not do to get what they want. If that means waiting, they wait.

Hilla the Hun had registered her presidential campaign in 2000, and in 1996, I believe, in order to report political donations. She will register again in 2004, and will appear in several primaries, all through no overt action of her own.

"They're going to fight her for it tooth and nail, contesting every delegate and every fund raising dollar."

I personally have strong doubts that ANY other democratic candidate would fight Miz Hillary too much. I continue to believe that she and the Mister know where ALL the bones are buried, and they control too many people via copies of FBI files, etc. And as we have already seen, elections can be controlled, too.

I just can't believe that many Americans would actually vote for her; on the other hand, I don't think she would actually run unless she was dead-solid sure she would win.

Look, the idea that a slew of Dem presidential wannabes are going to do nothing for 4 years; just sit around, twiddle their thumbs, and concede Hillary the 2008 nomination is just plain laughable. It ain't gonna happen. They're going to fight her for it tooth and nail, contesting every delegate and every fund raising dollar.

To do that, the Democrats will have to do what the didn't do in 1998 -- attack the Clinton's record. Do they have it in them?

-PJ

Are you trying to drive me nuts??????????? GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Freightening.

ping

Crystal Ball Bump.

I agree.She will run in 04. I just read a fluff piece on here here on FR and she even covers her eye rolling,she is running.

Heck, Freeper RLK has been telling us this for over 3 years now.

See, "Bill and Hillary Clinton as Borderline Psychotics" from February, 1999:

Hillary has led a similar life of ease and is now being pushed to take a senate seat and run for the presidency in 2004 on a platform of angrily confronting a vast right-wing conspiracy-- which essentially consists of making accusatory and sarcastic remarks at you and me through a TV screen to the delight of angry women, spoiled angry leftists, and angry minorities. It isn't a bad life for an untalented spoiled brat who, without the world of TV and alienated politics, would be lucky to hold a job as a waitress in a truck stop.

The scary part is the economy. If the economy keeps falling,war going bad, coupled with voter fraud, and the media saying how great she is and how rotten W is every day, she could be P.

Great job......as always!

Hillary!/Sharpton in 2004!

Do they still hold it at the train station, where the Memorial Day parade ends?

Seems to me that the Dems were grooming Hitlery all along as our "first woman president". They were counting on their control of the media as well as a weak majority in the senate to do their best to make Dubya look bad (despite his having fooled them repeatedly, exposing the naked emporer as it were). The figured that they could make the republicans look so bad that they would win over those middle-of-the-road voters that swing either way.

What they weren't counting on was an attack on our country by some crazy islamic terrorists. And that's what ticked Hitlery off on 9/11; it wasn't dead Americans or billions of dollars of destruction. Rather, it was her suddenly waning chances of winning an election in 2004.

Nothing is certain in politics, but if the economy is booming in 2004, expect Hillary! to keep a low profile and bide her time.

I think that you are probably correct. And with the Patriot Act now in force, God help us if she wins. And I wouldn't be surprised if she did.