Taking A Stand: Hillary and Gore planning for 2008
I guess some people never learn from their mistakes, especially when it comes to the political arena. This inability to get the big picture is exceptionally confusing when it involves an entire political party.
Going into the early Democratic primaries, Howard Dean is the clear-cut favorite to take the nomination for president. He’s running ahead in all the polls and is expected to hit the ground running after he is endorsed by the voters of New Hampshire, which happens to be the state next to his home Vermont. Most political analysts concur Dean is the man to beat in the Democratic race, with John Kerry and General Wesley Clark fighting for second.
If this trend continues, Dean will be taking on incumbent President George W. Bush in November, something I believe Republicans are rooting for given the track record of liberals when it comes to presidential races.
You don’t have to look back very far to see what happens when a person, identified as a liberal, which Dean is, runs for president. Sure, the Democrats are quick to give them the nomination, but that’s as far as it goes. Just look at Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale. Heck, look at Hubert H. Humphrey.
They were all soundly defeated in their bids because the American voters will not vote for a person who sways too far from the middle. That’s why Bill Clinton, who rode the center-line to two terms as president, was so popular.
Granted, the Democrats will try to turn Dean more moderate after the nomination, but the Republicans, at the same time, will be reminding the voters of Dean’s liberal tendencies. The end result will be a Dean loss as just getting anti-Bush votes will likely not be enough to win the White House.
Seemingly silent in this mistake in progress are the two Democratic powerhouses of Al Gore and Hillary Clinton, either of whom could mount a good race against Bush. Ever wonder why Gore turned his back on his old friend Lieberman to endorse Dean?
Folks, it’s all about 2008. Both Gore and Mrs. Clinton are eyeing the 2008 race. They bowed out of the 2004 campaign because it seemed an uphill battle back just a year ago, given Bush’s popularity and the anticipated upturn in the economy. This left the pair with a quandary. If a powerful Democrat is elected to the White House in 2004, then that would make their runs in 2008 more difficult since the ruling party doesn’t want to rock its own boat when it comes re-election time. Waiting four more years, until 2012, would mean outliving their shelf lives. At the same time, it’s important for neither Gore nor Clinton to look like they’re not playing team ball since they will need the backing of the party in 2008.
Therefore, all Gore had to do is open up his history book to see the track record of liberals in presidential races. By endorsing Dean he remains in the spotlight, looks like a team player and is likely backing the loser, leaving G.W. to win a second term and leaving himself, and possibly Clinton, to come out in 2008 against a fresh Republican opponent. Backing a potentially dangerous candidate like Clark could mean the worst for them since he could actually win. The Gores and Clintons know the Republican political machine will tear Dean apart when it comes crunch time this summer. They play the game well.
Now, perhaps they can seal the deal by convincing Dean to anoint Willie Horton as his running mate. That’ll leave Gore or Clinton laughing all the way to the White House in 2008.
(Duane Sherrill is a reporter for the Standard. He can be reached by calling 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].)