Josh Marshall has a good post on why the Democrats should not nominate Hillary Clinton for president in 2008. He cites two reasons: first, because it’s not good for America to continue having presidential and/or party power concentrated in two families (Clintons and Bushes); and second because Hillary would have a difficult time winning.
I don’t have anything against Senator Clinton’s ideology or her as a person. But I think it would a disaster waiting to happen if the Democrats nominate her. If John Kerry can’t be competitive across the south and west, there’s no way Hillary’s going to sell in red state America. Unfortunately, image and personality seem be as important factors for a successful presidential candidate these days as message and policy. And Hillary has been demonized for way too long for her to overcome the negative currency attached to her name.
Why does she have to sell to red state America? This election was lost on 150,000 votes in Ohio. If Kerry had convinced 75,000 people in Ohio to switch their votes from Bush to Kerry, we would be looking forward to a Kerry inauguration.
She’d have to pick up something to win. And frankly I don’t even see her hanging on to all the blue ones (WI, MI, and perhaps others).
I say let’s wait and see. Marshall makes good arguments, but maybe we should 1) wait a few months before starting the next presidential race and 2) give Hillary a chance to speak up once that happens. By 2008 a lot of stuff will have happened that may have changed some minds about what’s more important: “moral values (mine not yours)” or “reality-based” policies, bygone prejudices about a person or the issues he or she talks about.