Picking a Loser in 2016
As the Democratic Party chooses a candidate for the presidency in 2016, we should remember the party’s commitment to losing candidates, dating back to the great William Jennings Bryan, who lost not one, not two, but three presidential elections.
We should remember the example of Eleanor Roosevelt, who refused to support John F. Kennedy in 1960 because she supported Adlai Stevenson, who had lost only twice, and deserved a chance to equal Bryan’s record.
With all the demographic forces working in favor of the Democrats — every obituary improves their chances –we’re going to have to work hard to lose this one, but there’s one candidate who can do it!
I’m talking about a member of the board of directors of WalMart, a lawyer who worked for Monsanto, just like Clarence Thomas! A candidate who voted FOR the war in Iraq. A candidate that 51 percent of Americans do not like, whose only apparent qualification is that she really wants to be president.
I’m talking about Hillary Clinton. She has shown no passion for defending ordinary people. She prolonged the primary fight in ’08 long after she had clearly lost, tried mightily to subvert the so-called “super delegates,” and finally demanded that Obama pay off her campaign debts in return for her support.
Her campaign was marked by enormous expenditures on private planes and luxury hotels, with thousands of dollars spent on flowers, and her morning conference call included ten people, every one of whom had tried to stab the others in the back.
This candidate embodies everything we all detest.
Democrats lose when they nominate the person who is next in line. They win when Kennedy cuts in ahead of Johnson and Stevenson, when Obama cuts in ahead of Clinton.
We cannot win with Hillary in 2016. Like John Kerry, she has no passion for defending ordinary people. She disdains them. I say we nominate Kirsten Gillibrand — or, even better, Elizabeth Warren!