Home / General / A Lazy Pundit’s Wet Dream

A Lazy Pundit’s Wet Dream

/
/
/
919 Views

Book_Cover_1

The title alone guarantees you a blast furnace take. The nearly drama-free Democratic nomination contest, highly reminiscent of 2000, is 1968 all over again!

The expected battle of the dynasties between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush no longer seems inevitable.

This is some nicely done bullshit, pretending that the Democratic nomination is in serious doubt because the Republicans really do have a hotly contested primary. My question: who ever said Jeb! was inevitable? I think even those who (unlike me) think he’s the most likely to win would agree that he’s highly evitable.

Anyway, to the meat of the argument, such as it is:

Just as President Lyndon Johnson, whom everyone expected to run for re-election, symbolized the Democratic establishment then, Hillary Clinton does now. While Johnson controlled the party apparatus (which in 1968 still chose most of the delegates), Clinton has locked up most of the Democratic donors. Both of them, too, have already lost a nomination battle to a younger, more attractive candidate: LBJ to JFK in 1960, and Clinton to Barack Obama in 2008. And both have serious vulnerabilities that pundits initially underestimated: the Vietnam War for Johnson, and the ongoing email scandal for Clinton.

Wait, what?

the Vietnam War for Johnson, and the ongoing email scandal for Clinton.

Comparing the piddlyshit email non-scandal with Vietnam is so wrong on so many levels it’s hard to even know where to begin. But the idea that Hillary Clinton is going to give up her campaign over this crap is absurd.

Both of them seem to struggle to appeal to a huge new generation of voters: Boomers in 1968, Millennials now.

Is there any evidence for this claim about Clinton?

And like Johnson, Clinton has been challenged by an insurgent Senator with unusual views. Bernie Sanders of Vermont has cast himself in the role of Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, whom no one gave a snowball’s chance in hell when he announced for President late in 1967. When McCarthy nearly beat Johnson in New Hampshire, the President shocked America by dropping out of the race. Bernie Sanders has just surged ahead of Clinton in New Hampshire in at least one poll, and like McCarthy, will likely command the support of an army of young volunteers there.

Could Sanders give Clinton a very tough fight in New Hampshire? Sure. What is the possible basis for the belief that she would drop out if this happens? I have no idea.

I’ll skip the comparison between Biden and Humphrey because if Clinton stays in the race it’s irrelevant.

You’ve probably already guessed who has been drafted into RFK’s role:

The obvious candidate to fill RFK’s role as the one to shake things up would be another four-year Senator with a national following, who has resisted numerous urgings to get into the race earlier this year: Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. Warren insists that she is not going to run, but it’s always possible that she might feel very differently about a race against Sanders and Biden, should Clinton’s campaign founder.

And what if the Clinton emails implicate Clinton, Sanders, and Biden in the murder of Vince Foster, an entirely plausible scenario? I bet Warren runs! Fortunately, the Ambassador Hotel has been demolished.

Sure, it’s a long shot, but—while the Republicans are getting most of the attention now—history proves that the Democrats are still worth watching.

That word “proves,” it does not mean…

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar
Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views : Ad Clicks : Ad Views :