Don’t Run, Hillary

Ezra has advice for Hillary.

In addition to all the astute political points Ez makes, there are a couple of things that bother me about a Hillary presidency.

One: Were she to win and serve two terms, by the end of her 8 years, America would have been under the leadership of a Bush or Clinton for twenty-eight years. If you add in Bush Sr.’s eight years as veep, it brings the total to thirty-six years with either a Bush or Clinton in one of the top two government positions in the country. This isn’t a monarchy—two families having that much power over the direction of the nation is just too much.

[To clarify: Nightshift 66 says: "HRC didn't cause either Bush presidency, so a B-C-B-C run would be an historical accident." The issue here, for me, is that it's a historical accident that's icky and doesn't need to be further perpetuated. The whole point of a democracy is meant to be keeping power out of a limited number of hands, and even if it isn't her fault that her first opportunity comes at the tale end of this series, she nonetheless ought to have some regard for the antithesis of a democracy such a series inevitably is. (So should Jeb Bush, btw.)]

Two: Hillary is just as divisive a figure as was Bill, and as is Bush Jr. Unlike Bush, who endeavors to marginalize half of the country by ruling as though he had a sweeping mandate, it’s not really Hillary’s fault that she’s so divisive—movement conservatives hate the Clintons no matter what they do (even when they do things that piss off progressives, like DADT and DOMA and supporting flag-burning amendments). Nonetheless, that’s the reality, and I’m tired of having a country split in bloody two. There’s no guarantee that movement conservatives won’t react the same way to any Democratic president these days; perhaps John Edwards would attract the same level of ire. But there is a guarantee that a Hillary presidency will only inflame ideological opponents, and we’ll spend the foreseeable future focused on stupid personal crap as movement conservatives seek to fill a crazy vendetta. I don’t want a president who I know will be constantly embroiled in useless partisan disputes.

[To clarify: I'm not "hating on her because the opposition hates on her." I'm annoyed that she doesn't seem to want to recognize that they do, in a way unlike other potential candidates. Unless she genuinely feels that every other potential Dem nominee would make an utter hash of the presidency, it makes more sense for her to let them carry the mantle, since they don't carry the same baggage.]

Three: Hillary doesn’t seem to recognize—or care about—either of these things. I can kind of give a pass to her for ignoring the whole Clinton-Bush Reign thing, because she, as do all presidential candidates, believes she’s the best person for the job, which eclipses concerns about two families ruling for a generation. But I can’t give her a pass on turning a blind eye to the fact that her presidency will not remotely come close to moving beyond the bitter partisan divides that have fractured the country so deeply. I get the impression that her attitude is basically, “Tough shit. I wanna be president.” It’s as though she knows she can handle it, and that’s all that matters. But it isn’t. A lot of people, including me, are tired of the extreme polarization. It’s why, though I’d be unhappy with a Republican president, I’d prefer a Republican in the mold of Richard Lugar to one in the mold of George Allen—and it’s why there are moderates who would cast a vote for John Edwards, or Al Gore, or Wes Clark, but who would never cast a vote for Hillary.