Without Hillary Clinton, Dems May Lose Their Anchor
Dems Consider New Waters in Iowa
All eyes are on the Iowa caucuses today as the first state in the nation chooses who they want as their presidential nominees. For Democrats, many are considering reeling in the Clinton anchor and exploring new waters.
Since 1992 the Clintons have been the anchor of the Democratic party. Bill Clinton is still wildly popular amongst the Democratic base, and his popularity has enabled and buoyed his wife’s presidential bid. But Hillary’s lost “inevitability’ factor is one sign that many Democrats are considering moving their ships beyond the safe haven of Clinton’s charismatic populism and venturing into the “unknown” section of the political navigation charts, not knowing if they’ll discover a sea monster or the land of opportunity.
While Sen. Hillary Clinton’s bid to be the first woman president is groundbreaking, in many ways a vote for Clinton is a safe one for the Democrats. We know her, we know how Republicans will attack her, and we fondly remember the prosperity of the Clinton administration. People feel comfortable with what they know, and Bill stumping for a Hillary ticket is hard to pass up.
Edwards is also a safe bet, but he also carries the weight of the 2004 election defeat, and Democrats are looking for a winner.
But there’s a wind behind the Democratic sails that began with congressional wins and the seizing of the majority in Congress. Mostly unabated, those winds of victory are pulling at the sails of the familiar, emboldening many Dems to take a risk with the young upstart, Sen. Barack Obama.
The fact that Edwards, Clinton, and Obama are in a virtual dead heat on the night of the Iowa caucuses is very telling, as they each represent a different definition of change - the war cry of every election.
The front runners
Clinching the vice presidential nomination in 2004, Edwards has been through this ringer before and not done half bad. Democrats know him, like him, and he’s built a considerable groundwork in Iowa. In fact he hasn’t stopped running for president since 2003. The change he represents is the same as before: a departure from the atrocities of the Bush administration. Democrats like the sound of that (along with most of the world).
Clinton has also been around the block and continues to ride the wave of her husband’s appeal. And although she probably wants to be her own candidate (as Al Gore did in 2000), she knows from Gore’s experience and early campaign hiccups that she needs her husband, as evident by his constant campaigning. (As a side note, I’d wager that deep inside Bill helping Hillary win the presidency is his way of making up for the Lewinsky affair).
Clinton represents a duality of change with the comfort of already knowing her and the change she would bring as the first woman president.
Sen. Barack Obama is another matter, and the riskiest to Democrats comfortable with the last 15 years of talking points. The change he represents extends beyond a change in administration and the novelty of him being the first black president. Obama represents unknown territory for the Democrats. Some take the “There be monsters here” signs on the blackened portion of the map literally, and are greatly concerned that an Obama nomination would spell doom for Dems in ‘08.
The same fear that led to the worry of sea monsters is also a cause of concern for voters, especially since fear is the primary weapon of the Republican party. Is American society evolved enough to elect the first black president? Does Obama have the experience to be president? Do we know enough about him? And, most importantly as it is Obama’s theme: Does he have the judgment required for the grandest office in the land?. With a thin record Obama is passionately asserting that he does, in fact, he’s wagering his entire campaign on that argument.
Three different degrees of change for an emboldened Democratic electorate. All eyes are on Iowa tonight as the Democrats are about to show their hand. Will they double down on the familiar, split their bet, or throw a wild card?
But there is also another matter beyond who wins the nomination: What if the Clintons lose?
Bill Clinton has been touted as the best political mind in America. As the doyen anchor of the Democratic party, if Hillary loses, so does Bill Clinton. Hillary’s campaign for president is woven into Bill’s legacy. How pundits talk about Bill Clinton and how he will be remembered is changing with each poll number out Iowa and New Hampshire. A loss for the Clintons could be a bigger blow to the Democratic party than many expect. If Clinton loses, the Democratic anchor loses. And if the Democratic nominee for president loses, Democrats could find themselves alone in uncharted, hostile waters, without a map, and without their captain at the helm.
More on 2008 Election, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards
http://ian-albert.com/misc/bigimages/gutierrez/sea-monsters-1-100dpi.jpg
http://www.dropmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/edwards-clinton-obama-450.jpg
Stumble it!
Leave a Reply