I want to be cautious about overselling the upside potential of a Clinton candidacy, both because with the Clintons there is always something that undermines their promise and because I am not excited about a restoration. But Steve M. makes a good point about the fact that Rupert Murdoch will quite possibly side with Hillary against any plausible Republican candidate. And it could be only one sign of a major realignment. I’d expect John McCain and Lindsey Graham and the rest of the neo-cons (Bill Kristol, e.g.) to turn to Clinton if faced with a Rand Paul or Ted Cruz candidacy.
It’s hard to predict how public these folks will be about their defections, since it could be hazardous to their brand, their profits, or their political careers. But the sentiment will be there.
One advantage that Clinton has, and I’ve never seen this before, is that she doesn’t have to pander to expand on Obama’s base. All she has to do is hold onto Obama’s base, add her own (which overlaps significantly), and then wait with open arms as people flee the Republican nominee. Obama peeled off moderate Republicans, especially in 2008, winning endorsements from William Buckley’s son, Eisenhower’s kids, and Colin Powell. Those Republicans will probably stick with Clinton, and she could add the whole national security establishment simply by promising to keep the status quo on defense spending and the basics of our foreign policy and obligations. Then there are the PUMAs, the racist Democrats, the racist independents, the women who will be inspired to vote for the first time, etc.
While a Clinton candidacy will turn off a lot of progressives and some people who still harbor bad feelings from the 2008 primaries, this is an insignificant problem when weighed against her potential for growth.
It pains me to have to admit this, but she looks incredibly strong, and it’s an argument that other candidates will struggle to overcome.
I wish I trusted her more on foreign policy. I also wish she didn’t pal around with the likes of Lanny Davis.
Oh well.
