And yet this is all about me. Should I apologize, or can we just admit that’s an inherent aspect of this valence of the blogosphere?
Because the truth is that the great “candidate” post is something you always want to get around to but somehow gets put off because any starting point leads to seemingly daunting prospects.. Whether it’s Ezra Klein’s article about how, “It’s time to admit Hillary Clinton is an extraordinarily talented politician”―and it’s a very good article, but still you want to argue about what do you mean “it’s time”?―or perhaps reminding my Sanders-supporting neighbors why he’s endorsing Hillary Clinton, it’s actually a really big pitch; there’s a lot going on.
But the post need not be some grandiose presentation; nor is that a repudiation of the basic idea of pitching the campaign.
Let’s try it this way: Steve Benen considers the murmur and buzz around Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential shortlist, mainly reports that the leading contenders are Tom Vilsack, presently Secretary of Agriculture and formerly governor of Iowa; and Tim Kaine, presently the junior U.S. Senator from Virginia, previously serving as that state’s governor, and in between managing an overlapping gig as chairman of the Democratic National Committee:
Clinton seemed to tilt her hand a bit on Monday during an interview with Charlie Rose, which included the presumptive Democratic nominee emphasizing “experience” as the key factor. “I am afflicted with the responsibility gene,” she added.
The interview turned into a sort of word-association game. Asked about Kaine and his self-professed “boring” personality, Clinton said, “And I love that about him. I mean, he’s never lost an election. He was a world-class mayor, governor and senator, and is one of the most highly respected senators I know.”
Asked about Hickenlooper, Clinton said, “First class.” Asked about Warren, she added, “Amazing. I mean, what she has done in relatively few years to put the agenda of inequality front and center is something that I think we should all be grateful for.”
Sanders supporters, of course, will be disappointed; I would in turn suggest that hope is not yet lost. While it is true that on this occasion I can read the conventional wisdom as well as any other, it is similarly true that this is a year in which I presume the conventional wisdom unstable. To wit, while it is unlikely, Hillary Clinton is perfectly capable of turning the screw in order to mean the manner, relative dimension, and quality of experience, thus turning to the essential newcomer, Elizabeth Warren.
Yeah, it could happen.
But there is a hidden gem, there.
Let us accept, for sake of conventional wisdom argument, that the calculus really dose say Tom Vilsack or Tim Kaine, and thus it won’t be the junior U.S. Senator from Massachusetts.
Asked about Warren, she added, “Amazing. I mean, what she has done in relatively few years to put the agenda of inequality front and center is something that I think we should all be grateful for.”
Shall we be specific?
“To put the agenda of equality front and center is something that I think we should all be grateful for”. Okay, so it’s not Warren, but still: That’s the message, right there.
It’s easy to forget.
Bernie Sanders has a legitimate case about moneyed influence in politics.
And before the email tantrum struggling to overshadow Hillary Clinton’s presumptive nomination, and before Bernie indicted not only Hillary Clinton but millions of Democratic voters through the course of cycles who were apparently stupid enough to believe that compromise is necessary―we’re all corrupt, you know―there was email, and before that, Benghazi ....
Well, okay, before that, through that, and apparently still.
Somewhere in my memory I have a recollection of years spent in which liberals apologized for supporting the hawkish Hillary Clinton. For our purposes at this moment, there’s that.
Long story short, follow the history. And, really, it doesn’t seem so long ago I found myself suggesting that there comes a point at which Hillary Clinton’s high negative polling actually speaks to her credit. That is to say: After all this, here she is.
That really should mean something.
And the whole time it seems we’re forgetting something important. Indeed, it is an inevitable outcome of allowing Hillary Clinton’s enemies to define her.
This is the point: “To put the agenda of equality front and center is something that I think we should all be grateful for”.
It’s not so much that, the Democrats are back in business, baby! because, quite clearly, President Obama has done much during is term to remind that the Party never left. It’s been a rough twenty years―at least―for thse United States, and it is easy enough to forget the basic compromise Democrats struck, what, forty years ago?
You know, not quite thirty-five years ago, Jesse Jackson described an inclusive Democratic Party. Do you know what it’s like, looking back from these years later, and hear the Reverend including homosexuals? Including me? Bill Clinton won the argument on votes, but every Democrat knows Jesse Jackson won on points.
And we’re almost there.
And this is what we thought we were playing for the whole time.
Call it what you want: Compromise, holding your nose, corruption, whatever. This is why we were doing it.
Have we really forgotten?
We’re getting a civil rights president out of this.
Image note: Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton speaks to the General Conference of the African Methodist Episcopal Church during their annual convention at the Pennsylvania Convention Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 8 July 2016. (Photo: Charles Mostoller/Reuters)
Benen, Steve. “With decision looming, Clinton narrows VP short-list”. msnbc. 20 July 2016.
Klein, Ezra. “It’s time to admit Hillary Clinton is an extraordinarily talented politician”. Vox. 7 June 2016.
Rehkopf, Bill. “TRANSCRIPT: Sanders – ‘Why I’m endorsing Hillary Clinton'”. The Hill. 12 July 2016.