Notwithstanding her superb intellect and brilliant political eye (along with myriad other "pros"), I tend to argue that Hillary Clinton is about as electable, nationally, as John Kerry or Al Gore.
Nevertheless, it is becoming an ever more foregone conclusion that Hillary Clinton will be the Democrats' nominee in 2008. She's already locked down the first primary in the nation.
No, I am not talking about the famous first-in-the-nation primary in Jay Tea's beloved Granite State.
I am, of course, referring to the money primary. Hillary Clinton is systematically, methodically, and ruthlessly cornering the money game, in much the same way that George W. Bush did at this point before 2000.
Capital Eye explains:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) led all of her colleagues in first-quarter fundraising from 14 out of the top 50 industries ranked by campaign giving to members of Congress, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Indeed, Senator Clinton, increasingly a money-raising rock star, is attracting broad support from a variety of interests, all predicting she will one day be queen:
Of the 14 industries from which Clinton raised the most money, nine contributed more in individual and PAC donations to Republican lawmakers than to Democrats between January and March. They include traditionally Republican-leaning industries such as health professionals, retail sales and health services/HMOs.Clinton, who faces a reelection battle next year and is frequently mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2008, raised a total of more than $3.9 million in the first quarter of this year and reported having $8.7 million in the bank.
Obviously, because Mrs. Clinton has a Senate race coming up, she is going to raise more early money than other potential 2008 candidates.
But make no mistake. Hillary Clinton is raising this money with the Oval Office in mind.
Hillary Clinton intends to use her 2006 Senate race as an early jump on the 2008 race. Hillary Clinton's transition from Senate candidate in 2006 to Presidential candidate in 2008, in terms of raising money (donor lists), in terms of organizing grassroots networks (email lists, volunteer lists), in terms of crafting a campaign image (bumper stickers, a message that appeals to suburbanites and moderates), and in terms of fusing an experienced and battle-ready staff together, will be seamless.
You can just bet on the unofficial "Hillary in '08" campaign beginning on November 8, 2006. Clinton's entire 2006 campaign apparatus, even her website, is all calibrated toward achieving ultimate goal, the White House.
One of the few pollsters who got it right in 2004, Scott Rasmussen, has been following public perceptions of Hillary Clinton for the past few months. Interestingly, Hillary Clinton has one of the greatest political forces on her side: inevitability. Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe Hillary Clinton will be the nominee in 2008.
If the Hillary money-raising juggernaut continues to steam ahead, her campaign organization will become an exponentially-expanding amoeba, slurping up every last drop of available political money in its path. If that happens, expect Mrs. Clinton's aura of inevitability to overwhelm second-tier candidates (such as Joe Biden), driving them from the race before it even really begins.
Will Franklin is an exponentially-expanding amoeba, at WILLisms.com.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Politics
Comments (15)
She'll need some of that mo... (Below threshold)1. Posted by moseby | July 14, 2005 2:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
She'll need some of that money to have chuck schumer's head removed from her ass.
1. Posted by moseby | July 14, 2005 2:07 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 14:07
2. Posted by rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 2:09 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
And she will win too if we don't get someone that we can all agree on (or at least compromise on) who has some star power.
2. Posted by rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 2:09 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 14:09
3. Posted by Zsa Zsa | July 14, 2005 2:20 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I think Rudy or Jeb could beat Hillary...It is too depressing to think of another Clinton Administration... They really should go back to Arkansas!...Have they no pride?
3. Posted by Zsa Zsa | July 14, 2005 2:20 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 14:20
4. Posted by John | July 14, 2005 3:05 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Would couldn't beat Hillary? Unless the Republicans find someonemore unlikeable that Hillary, the Democrats have lost '08.
But I must give the Democrats this. I firmly believe Howard Dean was given a stage in order to make Hillary and the majority of Democrats look somewhat moderate. I fully expect Dean to be gone in a year or so and definitely just as or just before the serious campaigning begins for President.
4. Posted by John | July 14, 2005 3:05 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 15:05
5. Posted by McGehee | July 14, 2005 3:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hillary Clinton is not scary. Even a Hillary Clinton presidency is not to be feared.
Think of the comic possibilities!
5. Posted by McGehee | July 14, 2005 3:12 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 15:12
6. Posted by Bruce | July 14, 2005 3:28 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm curious: opinions/reactions on Billy Graham’s statement about the Clintons: "They're a great couple. ... He should be an evangelist because he has all the gifts and he could leave his wife to run the country." Graham has stated that he didn’t mean this as an endorsement of Hillary for president, so I’m just fishing for reactions to the statement.
6. Posted by Bruce | July 14, 2005 3:28 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 15:28
7. Posted by moderate repub | July 14, 2005 6:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
hillary is electable but the dems would do better with someone like warner.the dems will win the white house in 2008 or 2012, people don`t like one party in the white house for to long. by the way al gore was elected in 2000(got more votes)and kerry didn`t miss by much.if republicans nominate a right winger they have no chance.bushes choice on the supreme court can determine the outcome.
7. Posted by moderate repub | July 14, 2005 6:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 18:17
8. Posted by Rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 6:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Bruce,
My only thought was that Bill does have all the gifts... except a conscience.
8. Posted by Rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 6:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 18:37
9. Posted by Rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 6:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rudy can't beat her (way too much personal garbage and his marriages is only the tip of the iceberg) and Jeb won't run. The only one who can is the one so many don't want to hear...McCain.
Sorry, but that is just the damn truth.
9. Posted by Rightwingsparkle | July 14, 2005 6:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 18:39
10. Posted by Zsa Zsa | July 14, 2005 8:02 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I was so happy when they finally were gone!... The Clinton Era was over! ... I get depressed at the thought of the Clinton Family back in the White House. . .
10. Posted by Zsa Zsa | July 14, 2005 8:02 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 20:02
11. Posted by e_five | July 14, 2005 8:39 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Just wondering... Bush had a wide lead the GOP in fundraising in 1999, largely, I suppose because of his pedigree. How is this obscenely different? Wouldn't you expect it just on the basis of name recognition?
11. Posted by e_five | July 14, 2005 8:39 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 20:39
12. Posted by penny | July 14, 2005 10:10 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
So, is Condi not a consideration? Smart, classy, no dirt ......uh, I'd love to see a smackdown between her and the Hildabeast.
Sorry, but I don't trust John McCain.
12. Posted by penny | July 14, 2005 10:10 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 22:10
13. Posted by ed | July 14, 2005 10:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hmmm.
IMHO if Bill Richardson wants the Democratic Party's nomination in 2008, he's got it. If he ran Hillary wouldn't have a chance.
This guy has no negatives
Does well in speeches
Does well in interviews on tv
Doesn't go all bat-shit crazy
Doesn't have any issues or quotes that could be used to beat him up.
Is now a state govenor after having left congress
But we'll have to see if he's going to run. If he doesn't then maybe Hillary will get the nod. If he does run, it's all locked up.
13. Posted by ed | July 14, 2005 10:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 22:34
14. Posted by ed | July 14, 2005 10:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hmmmm.
"I'm curious: opinions/reactions on Billy Graham’s statement about the Clintons:"
Many times people say things to be nice, not necessarily to set some policy or agenda.
14. Posted by ed | July 14, 2005 10:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 14, 2005 22:35
15. Posted by POINTMAN | July 16, 2005 1:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
HILLARY WILL WIN IF SHE RUNS .
AMERICA IS MORE THAN READY FOR A REAL CHANGE .
ITS TOO BAD PEOPLE WOULD RATHER CONDEMN HER THAN PRAISE HER EFFORTS AND HER ABILITIES .
SHE IS THE FRONT-RUNNER BECAUSE THERE IS NO ONE MORE POPULAR WITH A BETTER PAST .
WHAT STANDS OUT MORE IN HER FAVOR IS THE FACT THAT ANY DEMOCRAT IN OFFICE MEANS MORE HELP FOR THE PEOPLE AND LESS SPENDING ON WAR-RELATED ISSUES.
POINTMAN
15. Posted by POINTMAN | July 16, 2005 1:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 16, 2005 01:58