election musings
The following is just some armchair political strategizing I was doing last night as I was trying to fall asleep:
As a Republican, it may come as a surprise that the two washington insider talking heads whose opinions/predictions I most respect are none other than George Stephanopolis and Dick Morris. George strikes me as someone who knows what he has learned, knows what he has yet to learn, and comprehends the full meaning and implications of EVERYTHING he learns when it comes to Washington politics.
Dick Morris comes across as easily the most politically shrewd student of the game and the people who play it. If politics is chess, Morris is the guy who can combine his mastery of objective strategy with his quick study of the profile of both players and end up telling you exactly how the match is going to play out after just a couple moves on each player's part.
So, when Dick Morris says on a cable news talk show that his money on Kerry's VP pick is none other than one Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton, I sit up and pay attention. What could POSSIBLY be his rationale for making that prediction???
Well, it seems Dick Morris is convinced that Senator Clinton wants to be President. In fact, he speaks with the certainty of one who knows this from multiple close sources. He asserts that this knowledge is so assumed in Democratic power circles that Kerry must certainly be aware of it.
Problem being, if Kerry wins in November and Hillary is not on the ticket, then you are looking at an extremely high probability that she will NEVER have the opportunity to be president. A president Kerry will certainly get his party's nomination in 2008 and if he wins his vice president will certainly get the nomination in 2012. If the VP wins that race, he or she will certainly get the nomination in 2016.
One has to assume that if Hillary were prepared to run against a mid-term Republican she would have chosen this year to do it. So she's looking for clear opportunity to run without her opponent having any natural edge.
So, if Bush wins in November with Cheney on the ticket, that means Hillary would run against a Republican newcomer 2008(Cheney will not run ) and would be on even footing with the Republican with odds being greater that the country will be ready to put the other party in the white house by that point.
The only scenario better than this, argues Morris, is if Kerry picks Hillary as his running mate. If Kerry loses, Hillary can still run in 2008, nothing gained nothing lost. But if Kerry/Clinton wins in November, then Hillary has a much stronger chance of winning in 2012 provided the administration doesn't screw up.
So with this line of thinking, Hillary is looking at a good run in 2008 if Bush wins or a really strong run in 2012 if Kerry taps her and they win. Bottom line, if Kerry does not tap her, then she will have ZERO motivation to want to see Kerry elected. Morris firmly believes that she and Bill will put the extremely powerful Clinton political machine to work in order to hamstring Kerry so that he loses in November. Morris did not go into what this effort would entail, but I have to imagine she would be more than willing to ensure any sensitive personal skeletons were leaked at strategic times if it came to that.
So Morris opines that Kerry, knowing that the Clinton machine can derail him, will ultimately decide to invite Hillary onto the ticket.
But here's my problem with that, and why I think Morris may be wrong about how Kerry will ultimately decide.
First, Hillary brings you nothing in terms of electoral votes. There is not a state that Hillary can steal from Bush, and there is not a swing state that would be moved into Kerry's camp on the strength of Clinton's presence.
Quite the opposite, in fact, can happen and this is my second point. In a swing state like let's say...OHIO...which every pundit agrees will likely be this election's Florida, would she actually be the kiss of death? Hillary doesn't do squat and may hurt the Dems' chances. Not only do she have somewhat of an image problem among swing voters in a lot of the manufacturing and agricultural states, but let's face it, some union-loving steel worker who is inclined to the left but kind of enjoys the good ol' boy image of George W. isn't likely to be the most egalitarian guy out there when it comes to women, no matter that Hillary has union bosses in her pocket by virtue of her position on Health, Eductation, Labor and Pensions Committee in the Senate. A state like Ohio may just be pushed to the right by the presence of Hillary this time around.
But Kerry can't just ignore Hillary and the threat her opposition to his candidacy would represent.
I think Kerry should pick a VP that takes nothing away from him and quite possibly delivers a swing state (Ohio would be nice, but I can't think of anyone that easily gives him that state). But he should seek to form a treaty with Hillary that is kept as hush hush as possible for as long as possible.
That is this: She supports Kerry's candidacy or at least does nothing to sabatoge it. If Kerry loses anyway, then she is just fine.
If Kerry wins, he appoints a faceless nobody to the position of Secretary of State. This person can be the fall guy for any and all failures of the Kerry administration to vastly improve on our position internationally in the first two years. And, of course, there will be plenty of criticism, as the expectations of a Kerry administration to foster strong relationships overseas will just be too high to live up to.
In the meantime, Hillary stays seasoned in the Senate. She gets off the Environment and Public Works Committee, and instead gets on the Foreign Relations Committee. This along with her position on the Armed Services Committee, will make her a natural candidate to forego a run for re-election and instead accept an invitation from Kerry to replace the "regrettably resigned" Secretary of State. Or, if the Secretary of Defense is even more embattled come 2006, then Kerry can make an even bolder move and name her to that position (less likely). Though the Republicans will certainly not want to see her gain such a high profile position in the Kerry Administration, by virtue of her being an alumnus of the Foreign Relations Committee (which reviews the State Secretary nomination) she will get the John Ashcroft treatment but, like him, will be passed through by the committe upon which she so recently had served. Unless the make-up of the Senate has changed drastically by then, she will definitely win an up or down vote on the Senate floor. All she has to do for two years is avoid any serious criticism of her job in the State Department.
Then in 2008, Kerry pulls a Nixon and simply chooses Hillary as his running mate, with his present VP stepping down for whatever reason (which is EXACTLY what Bush should be doing with Colin Powell this year). Unless he is embattled as a President, choosing a controversial woman at that stage of the game will not hurt his chances for re-election. She would be an almost shoe-in to be the next vice president, and would be her party's presumptive nominee come 2012 and in the best possible position to win the Presidency.
That's my take anyway. I wonder what Dick Morris would think of it??
As a Republican, it may come as a surprise that the two washington insider talking heads whose opinions/predictions I most respect are none other than George Stephanopolis and Dick Morris. George strikes me as someone who knows what he has learned, knows what he has yet to learn, and comprehends the full meaning and implications of EVERYTHING he learns when it comes to Washington politics.
Dick Morris comes across as easily the most politically shrewd student of the game and the people who play it. If politics is chess, Morris is the guy who can combine his mastery of objective strategy with his quick study of the profile of both players and end up telling you exactly how the match is going to play out after just a couple moves on each player's part.
So, when Dick Morris says on a cable news talk show that his money on Kerry's VP pick is none other than one Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton, I sit up and pay attention. What could POSSIBLY be his rationale for making that prediction???
Well, it seems Dick Morris is convinced that Senator Clinton wants to be President. In fact, he speaks with the certainty of one who knows this from multiple close sources. He asserts that this knowledge is so assumed in Democratic power circles that Kerry must certainly be aware of it.
Problem being, if Kerry wins in November and Hillary is not on the ticket, then you are looking at an extremely high probability that she will NEVER have the opportunity to be president. A president Kerry will certainly get his party's nomination in 2008 and if he wins his vice president will certainly get the nomination in 2012. If the VP wins that race, he or she will certainly get the nomination in 2016.
One has to assume that if Hillary were prepared to run against a mid-term Republican she would have chosen this year to do it. So she's looking for clear opportunity to run without her opponent having any natural edge.
So, if Bush wins in November with Cheney on the ticket, that means Hillary would run against a Republican newcomer 2008(Cheney will not run ) and would be on even footing with the Republican with odds being greater that the country will be ready to put the other party in the white house by that point.
The only scenario better than this, argues Morris, is if Kerry picks Hillary as his running mate. If Kerry loses, Hillary can still run in 2008, nothing gained nothing lost. But if Kerry/Clinton wins in November, then Hillary has a much stronger chance of winning in 2012 provided the administration doesn't screw up.
So with this line of thinking, Hillary is looking at a good run in 2008 if Bush wins or a really strong run in 2012 if Kerry taps her and they win. Bottom line, if Kerry does not tap her, then she will have ZERO motivation to want to see Kerry elected. Morris firmly believes that she and Bill will put the extremely powerful Clinton political machine to work in order to hamstring Kerry so that he loses in November. Morris did not go into what this effort would entail, but I have to imagine she would be more than willing to ensure any sensitive personal skeletons were leaked at strategic times if it came to that.
So Morris opines that Kerry, knowing that the Clinton machine can derail him, will ultimately decide to invite Hillary onto the ticket.
But here's my problem with that, and why I think Morris may be wrong about how Kerry will ultimately decide.
First, Hillary brings you nothing in terms of electoral votes. There is not a state that Hillary can steal from Bush, and there is not a swing state that would be moved into Kerry's camp on the strength of Clinton's presence.
Quite the opposite, in fact, can happen and this is my second point. In a swing state like let's say...OHIO...which every pundit agrees will likely be this election's Florida, would she actually be the kiss of death? Hillary doesn't do squat and may hurt the Dems' chances. Not only do she have somewhat of an image problem among swing voters in a lot of the manufacturing and agricultural states, but let's face it, some union-loving steel worker who is inclined to the left but kind of enjoys the good ol' boy image of George W. isn't likely to be the most egalitarian guy out there when it comes to women, no matter that Hillary has union bosses in her pocket by virtue of her position on Health, Eductation, Labor and Pensions Committee in the Senate. A state like Ohio may just be pushed to the right by the presence of Hillary this time around.
But Kerry can't just ignore Hillary and the threat her opposition to his candidacy would represent.
I think Kerry should pick a VP that takes nothing away from him and quite possibly delivers a swing state (Ohio would be nice, but I can't think of anyone that easily gives him that state). But he should seek to form a treaty with Hillary that is kept as hush hush as possible for as long as possible.
That is this: She supports Kerry's candidacy or at least does nothing to sabatoge it. If Kerry loses anyway, then she is just fine.
If Kerry wins, he appoints a faceless nobody to the position of Secretary of State. This person can be the fall guy for any and all failures of the Kerry administration to vastly improve on our position internationally in the first two years. And, of course, there will be plenty of criticism, as the expectations of a Kerry administration to foster strong relationships overseas will just be too high to live up to.
In the meantime, Hillary stays seasoned in the Senate. She gets off the Environment and Public Works Committee, and instead gets on the Foreign Relations Committee. This along with her position on the Armed Services Committee, will make her a natural candidate to forego a run for re-election and instead accept an invitation from Kerry to replace the "regrettably resigned" Secretary of State. Or, if the Secretary of Defense is even more embattled come 2006, then Kerry can make an even bolder move and name her to that position (less likely). Though the Republicans will certainly not want to see her gain such a high profile position in the Kerry Administration, by virtue of her being an alumnus of the Foreign Relations Committee (which reviews the State Secretary nomination) she will get the John Ashcroft treatment but, like him, will be passed through by the committe upon which she so recently had served. Unless the make-up of the Senate has changed drastically by then, she will definitely win an up or down vote on the Senate floor. All she has to do for two years is avoid any serious criticism of her job in the State Department.
Then in 2008, Kerry pulls a Nixon and simply chooses Hillary as his running mate, with his present VP stepping down for whatever reason (which is EXACTLY what Bush should be doing with Colin Powell this year). Unless he is embattled as a President, choosing a controversial woman at that stage of the game will not hurt his chances for re-election. She would be an almost shoe-in to be the next vice president, and would be her party's presumptive nominee come 2012 and in the best possible position to win the Presidency.
That's my take anyway. I wonder what Dick Morris would think of it??