Republicans are excited about this Time cover because they think it makes Clinton look like she has devil horns. Seriously. Go check out National Review‘s blog if you don’t believe me.
If you are at all superstitious, this New York Times story by Nicholas Confessore, Jonathan Martin, and Maggie Haberman about the inevitability of Hillary Clinton ought to be triggering serious alarm bells for you. Get a load of this paragraph:
“Anytime you have all your eggs in one basket, it is a concern,” said Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware, acknowledging the risk Democrats were running by deferring to Mrs. Clinton. “Although if you’re going to have them all in one, this basket is a good place to be.”
Talk about tempting fate! I’m an atheist, but just reading this quote makes me want to throw salt over my left shoulder while making the sign of the cross and bellowing the word “JINX” 137 times, because everyone knows that if you say “jinx” an even number of times it doesn’t work due to the law of double negatives. My mind is reeling with other things Governor Markell could have said:
“Anytime you try to kill the golden goose in hopes of figuring out how it makes the golden eggs, it is a concern,” said Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware, acknowledging the risk Democrats were running by relying on Democratic voting demographics to turn out in 2016 for a candidate who will go through essentially no serious primary challenge. “Although if you’re going to murder your golden goose, this one certainly seems to be asking for it!”
“Anytime you try to count your chickens before they hatch, it is a concern,” said Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware, acknowledging the risk Democrats were running by deferring to Mrs. Clinton. “Although if you’re going to count them before they hatch, these eggs sure do look awfully healthy, don’t they?”
“Anytime you ask what could possibly go wrong, it is a concern,” said Gov. Jack Markell of Delaware, acknowledging the risk Democrats were running by deferring to Mrs. Clinton. “Although, to be frank, what could possibly go wrong with a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign?”
Look. I think Hillary Clinton could be a very strong candidate. I don’t believe this e-mail imbroglio is really going to amount to much in the eyes of the general public, the same way Benghazi and Whitewater only matter to the conservative fringe. And as much as Republicans love to hate her, I believe Clinton would enjoy a tremendous groundswell of support among independents and even centrist Republicans in comparison to the unfettered (racist) vitriol that Obama has had to deal with.
But if we’re seriously looking at a race between Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders, and Hillary Clinton, I think this is a sign that the Democratic Party could be in for some lean years ahead. Where are our options? Why aren’t any young up-and-comers willing to give this a shot? Are they afraid of retribution from the Clintons? Is everybody just willing to sit this cycle out and politely wait their turn? This isn’t elementary school. It’s real life, and in real life, the unexpected happens. This is the reason why we have cliches about eggs in baskets and counting eggs and golden geese. For the sake of the party, will no young Democrat heed these very important pieces of bird-related advice?
This is why http://www.runwarrenrun.org exists. Who knows whether we’ll succeed. But it’s better that putting all our eggs in one basket, dropping that basket from a roof, and hoping everything stays whole after the fall.
She’s been vetted more than any human on earth. She has serious domestic and foreign policy credentials. She has the gravitas. With a good running mate (Antonio Villaraigosa? Henry Cisneros?) she could wipe out the opposition, no problem. And underestimating her should be left to the right. They always have.
Looks to me like she has bunny ears and wants to say hello to Roger.
Henry Cisneros?
Too much baggage in his closet, ace.
As long as Hills doesn’t squawk about I-502, it doesn’t matter.
@3 What “baggage” are you referring to? Cisneros was indicted on only 18 felony counts and pleaded to 1 misdemeanor. It’s hard to find any Republican with a record that clean. Speaking of which …
“I don’t know if I’m a thief; I’m not an attorney.”
That’s not exactly what Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) said verbatim, but it’s close enough: ” So Politico decided to ask him directly if he broke the law, and his answer is priceless: “Well, I certainly hope not. […] I’m not an attorney.”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....ail=email#
Roger Rabbit Commentary: I didn’t become an attorney until I was almost 30, but I knew something about right and wrong by the time I graduated from kindergarten. The only people who need an attorney telling them whether they should refrain from doing something are those playing at the edges of the law, which usually is well over the lines of elementary ethics and morality.
One of the long-term consequences of the 2010 and 2014 elections is the down-ballot effect upon the ranks of future national Democrat leaders.
Yes, there may very well be 2016 to worry about, but the Democrat bench is thin over the next couple of decades beyond that.
Unless it’s rebuilt, of course.
“One of the long-term consequences of the 2010 and 2014 elections…”
“the Democrat bench is thin over the next couple of decades beyond that.
Unless it’s rebuilt, of course.”
That might actually make sense, Bob. So in 2006 and 2008, the ranks of future Republican leaders was culled, leaving a thin bench, and then your rebuilding program began in 2010. You looked to your farm system and brought up what you could find from your AA Galtian and the TeaBircher D League teams.
So how’s the team currently doing? Let’s see, the Republican congress threatens to shut down the Department of Homeland Security even as they’re firing off a letter to the Ayatollah seeking to form an alliance with Iranian hard-liners against the executive branch of our own government. As for 2016, given his popularity within your party, if he threw his hat in the ring, and it looks like he just might, you guys could even end up with Netanyahu on the ticket, if not Putin, he of the iron fist you guys admire so much.
This is not only not good for our nation, Bob, just look at the toll this madness has taken on our friend, Puddy, leaving him to stand like an idiot on an internet street-corner, yelling at everybody who passes by how Iran is going FedEx dirty bombs to Whidbey Island.
“Unless it’s rebuilt, of course.”
I have to say, Bob, that last rebuild of yours didn’t go so well. Truly, for the sake of our nation, better luck when you start your next one in 2018.
People who are angry at the US having an African-American president, are going to be equally annoyed by a Liberal woman president.
@2… “She has serious domestic and foreign policy credentials.”
LOL!
Hey Paul,
Good to see you doing political writing here. It was your following of the 2012 campaign that got me reading Slog in the first place. Anyway the Political Scientist Jonathan Bernstein takes up this questions which has been raised by quite a few in the commentariat.
http://www.bloombergview.com/a.....e-serious-
The Clintons have had several wingnut billionaires constantly chewing on them to a greater or lesser degree for the last quarter century. I’m not surprised Hillary is paranoid. I would want to control my email account too if I were her. Unless she is proven to have sold baby pelts to Mexican drug cartels or some Teabagger killed Her in a fit of second amendment lust the woman is as good as gold.
Bush, Clinton. Bush, Clinton. This country is fucking dead.