There are people that I know and respect that are supporting Hillary Clinton for president. I resist the instinct to ascribe either bad faith or stupidity to them because they are neither stupid nor dishonest. But I am still mystified. How can you go into battle every day for years and not notice that the Clintons are not at your side? How can you watch the New Democrats and Blue Dogs capitulate to the Republicans over and over again and even consider electing a New Democrat to be the nominee of the party? Republicans, at least, understand. Take Rich Lowry.
It is the curse of Clintonism that it is associated with the Clintons.
A centrist-oriented Democratic politics that is pragmatic and economically literate is better than the alternatives: a fluffy politics of hope (Barack Obama) and angry politics of anti-corporate zeal (John Edwards). At least on paper.
For the champions of this otherwise preferable approach are Bill and Hillary Clinton…
Al Gore would have been the natural ideological successor in 2000, but angered by Bill’s spectacularly irresponsible conduct in office, he distanced himself and lurched left. Since the left-wing base of the Democratic party never liked the Clinton pragmatism, the only ones with support in the party strong enough to maintain a relative centrism are the Clintons themselves.
And so the devil’s bargain: Clintonism comes only with the Clintons attached.
Look at the Republicans. Just look at them. Over and over and over again they admit that their policy preference is for a New Democrat to win the nomination. They are not saying this because they think they can beat a New Democrat. Lowry made it plain.
A centrist-oriented Democratic politics that is pragmatic and economically literate is better than the…angry politics of anti-corporate zeal (John Edwards).
Do you understand? Republicans find the Clintons acceptable on policy. They dislike them personally, but who cares? Many country club Republicans would vote for the Clintons in a Greenwich, Connecticut minute over Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, or any other serious conservative. They want corporatism, not rule by evolution-deniers.
Bill Clinton has many talents. So does his wife. But they aren’t on our side and never have been on our side. Why is this so difficult for smart people that are paying attention to understand?
did you vote for bob casey?
i didnt understand anyone who voted for him.
how can you be a democrat and think casey is on your side or by your side or is even on the same bus as you?
the casey supporters said at least we will have enough dems, if casey wins, to investigate…..hows that working for us?
clinton is more of a democrat than casey will ever be.
please explain why you have such a big problem with hilary but pulled that lever for casey?
i have noticed many many progressive bloggers trashing hilary but they were not so unhappy about casey when he was annointed to be our senator from pa.
i didnt see nearly as much venom directed to casey as i do towards hilary…..why is that?
I do not see it as inconsistent at all. He didn’t vote for Casey in the primary (to my knowledge) and he would vote for Hilary in the general if she won the nomination (my prediction).
Booman was pretty vocal in his opposition to Casey in the general and upset that there wasn’t a stronger primary challenge from the left. Hilary does face a strong primary challenge from the left.
PS The article was good, but the link bad.
I not only trashed Casey, I trashed his staff publicly, and refused to shake hands with Casey when I met him in person. I voted for Casey in the general because I wanted Santorum humiliated.
Also, Casey has a higher progressive score than Russ Feingold or Teddy Kennedy. That was expected. He’s good on most things, just not on anything related to Catholic dogma.
I feel a lot better about my mean phone calls to his office now.
Progressive Punch is.
That’s what Hillary is offering. More of the same. Some of the same was OK, and some was not. NAFTA sucked. Jobs were good, but that was not a repeatable deal in many ways.
Hillary supports the wholesale export of US jobs and the wholesale import of overseas scabs to take US jobs. We don’t need H-1B visas, and she is paid off by the Indian body shop lobby.
I will vote for her, but not with much enthusiasm.
Well said, well said.
this question has been, as expected, a major part of the conversations l’ve had so far over the holidays. from those l’m coming to see her support, at least in the circles within the six degrees of separation that l frequent, as very ageist, for lack of a better term, in nature.
most of the people l know who support her candidacy are boomers, as am l, and their two basic reasons are a desire to return to, what they percieve to be, the halcyon days of the 90’s, and the fact that she’s a woman.
there appears to be very little in-depth understanding of her positions, and quite nearly all of those who are rabid in their support, are unable to offer more than a shallow defense…usually based on the dlc/dccc line. eventually they grow weary of the discussion and end up accusing me of being everything from an old hippie, anarchist, left wing looney; to veiled, as well as rather overt, charges of misogyny.
there is a huge disconnect from the reality of her candidacy out there, and it’s not just the RATpublicans that are swimming in de-nile.
discussing the matter with people who are more reality based, some of whom are closely associated with the house and senate races here, a very different view can be heard. these folks are not looking forward to hillary being at the top of the ticket, and are very concerned about the negative effect her coattails will have on their chances. this is particularly true for mark udall’s people, as well as those backing markey v musgrave in cd-4…already a tight, and likely losing proposition, brought to us courtesy of the salazar/dlc/bush dog dinos and the dccc of the state party apparatus, who abandoned angie paccione who, btw, nearly pulled off an upset in 06 without their support.
the second point, the fact that she’s a woman who is considered a serious contender for the presidency…which l do not disagree with conceptually…is much more contentious. the people who support her with this as their primary motivation are very uncomfortable and offended when challenged. so, l will refrain from going there in the interest of comity.
lTMF’sA
This is exactly my experience.
Well said.
I have no idea why bloggers who claim to be ideological progressives are actively supporting Hillary. But I’m not as surprised as you are that they are.
It would make an interesting study for some Pol. Sci PhD candidate. I’ve never really bought into the rational choice model as being very useful in actually predicting who someone will support – and the last two elections seemed to bear that out. But most of the focus after those presidential elections was on why people vote against their own self interest in favor of ideology. In this case, there is support for Hillary that goes against the ideology of the supporter – but there doesn’t necessarily seem to be any benefit to self-interest associated with it.
I have no idea why bloggers who claim to be ideological progressives are actively supporting Hillary.
Fear of another Republican presidency. I admit that I am tempted (?) by fear at times. Just imagine another Republican presidency – a long drawn-out withdrawl from Iraq with large permanent bases left behind, no movement on national healthcare, more tax cuts, more indebtedness, more free trade with countries that don’t reciprocate, more oil consumption, more war on science, more war on the middle class, blah, blah, blah. Scary and/or depressing stuff. Clinton looks promising by comparison.
But she looks lousy in light of what the country needs. And I’m going to vote on that basis, and hope I will be making a winning choice.
I would argue, from Hillary’s voting record and campaign remarks, that we could expect a long drawn-out withdrawl from Iraq with large permanent bases left behind, no movement on national healthcare (she’d galvanize GOP opposition to her doing healthcare again), more tax cuts, more indebtedness, more free trade with countries that don’t reciprocate, etc. I would argue that she doesn’t look all that promising by comparison either.
i have to agree with UR and booman.
we’ll get 4-8 more years of republicanism if any clinton is back in the white house.
very discouraging that she seems to be doing so well and supported by many left bloggers etc
Dude, that’s Hillary’s PLATFORM.
Not with people who are ideological progressives. The general public, yes. But ideological progressives? No.
At least, I don’t think it’s fear of losing to the Republicans. It might very well be fear of a Presidency that can’t accomplish anything because it is untested. They may be buying into the Hillary is competent theme.
And let’s admit it – nobody wants a Democratic presidency that isn’t able to lead from Day #1. The honeymoon period is so short. So maybe that’s a justifiable fear.
Lower than estimated retail sales for Christmas is an indication to me that America is making her decision-both Rep & Dem alike. The trumpet is sounding for the economy that middle America lives in and that’s going to be a plus for Edwards. So Hillary better call up Hertz in Iowa and get all the commuter vans rented because with the weather Iowa’s been having, those little old ladies she’s been counting on just may need a lift to get there.
Some People Don’t Get It
But I am still mystified.
From what you say, you are the one that “doesn’t get it” 😉
Those smart people that are paying attention almost certainly have different values than you do. Similar but different.
For some of them, it just might be that centrist appeal to the country-club set. Knowing that she could, in fact pick up republican votes.
Personally, I don’t care if the Republicans find the Clintons acceptable. What matters to me is whether I find them acceptable. (which I don’t)
Running around telling people they don’t get it isn’t going to change their mind, it will just cause their defences to go up.
It’s not that.
Hillary doesn’t share their values and they know it. And they don’t care. A few are women that are just damn ready to have a woman president. But they would never vote for Olympia Snowe, even though Snowe wouldn’t betray them.
Thank you, boo, thank you