I am a staunch Sanders supporter, and won’t mislead anyone about the serious issues I have regarding Hillary Clinton as a human being as well as a candidate. The list of her real and perceived shortcomings needs no more enumeration here, as they have been cited, reinforced, repeated and debated on this site (let’s just say...) a lot.
But, I have been on this planet long enough not hold out many illusions about the political establishment in this country, or its candidates. I’m a registered Democrat, but voted for Nader in 2000, and Jill Stein in 2012. I voted for Obama in 2008 solely based on my actually believing his promise to “change the culture of lobbying in Washington”. This was right before he appointed William Lynn III, the top lobbyist for Raytheon Co., to the #2 position in the defense department. I guess there is still some gullibility left in me.
So, the idea that a true, incorruptible idealist could be elected president of the US , is not something I have kidded myself about ever since I saw “Mr. Deeds Goes to Washington.” In presidential politics, good guys almost always finish, if not last, close enough (and you don’t have to finish last in order to lose). Yet, someone has to be placed in that position every 4 years, as flawed as the system and its candidates invariably are.
Which brings us to Madam Secretary. I don’t hate Hillary, and I could live with her as President (albeit with profound, deep disappointment), because generally this is about the best the system in its present condition will allow (as much as I hope and pray for Bernie to pull off some kind of miracle).
I don’t want this diary to appear to be someone throwing in the towel after one setback. But the disappointment in Nevada, has (let’s be honest) left more than a few of us thinking: “Ugh...what if she actually wins the nomination?”
If I may again quote professor Chomsky, after the 2012 election he said, (his being no huge fan of Obama to begin with) “it could have been a lot worse”. Personally, my view of Obama is that he has managed to keep his finger in the dam, just barely keeping humanity from being totally wiped out by what would have certainly happened had Republicans been in control of all three branches of government.
Maybe Hillary would be able to do the same, and perhaps not. But, time marches inexorably on, Wall Street’s grip gets ever tighter, students’ debts get ever deeper, climate change becomes ever more severe, the middle class continues to disappear… the well-worn list goes on and on, and this has all been under a Democratic President for 8 years.
Chomsky also recently said that Hillary Clinton is a lot like Obama, just more of a hawk.
So, as a romantic, I hope for Bernie. But, as a realist, I’m left with the possibility of either a another President who knows how to say what they know “the people” want to hear, or a Republican who knows how to say what at least progressives can’t bear to hear.
And, Hillary Clinton is not even similar Barack Obama, in a lot of ways. For one, she isn’t liked within the Democratic party by a substantial percentage of its own members. Yes, we’ll vote for her against a Ted Cruz or Donald Trump, just as many members of the GOP will vote for Cruz and Trump against Hillary Clinton. But, from a strictly political standpoint, the main problem with Madam Secretary is that not only do significant numbers of her own party have serious problems with her, not only do virtually all Republicans actively and literally despise her, but that critical group known as “Independents”, are even less partial to her than her own Democrats.
There’s the rub: while we now seem to be focused on the Bernie vs Hillary drama regarding the nomination, the fact remains, and the national polls bear out, Hillary’s “unfavorables” make it almost as unlikely that she could win a National election, as it seems that Bernie could pull out a win for the Democratic nomination.
Or, as H. A. Goodman in his most recent Salon piece (Hillary Clinton just can’t win: Democrats need to accept that only Bernie Sanders can defeat the GOP) succinctly puts it:
Please name the last person to win the presidency alongside an ongoing FBI investigation, negative favorability ratings, questions about character linked to continual flip-flops, a dubious money trail of donors, and the genuine contempt of the rival political party. In reality, Clinton is a liability to Democrats, and certainly not the person capable of ensuring liberal Supreme Court nominees and President Obama’s legacy.
This is not any kind of new revelation, of course. But, I’m not sure that as a group of relatively astute political observers (here at DK) that the ramifications of the very distinct likelihood that HRC will (perhaps cannot) not win the Presidency, after being nominated, has really sunken in, let alone been meaningfully addressed.
I don’t pretend to have the answers (apart from a major Bernie upset). I just don’t believe in keeping one’s head in the sand, either.