Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Jonah Goldberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
Candidate Hillary: The GOP's Dream
by Jonah Goldberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


The most interesting thing to come out of the umpteenth Republican debate Sunday is confirmation that the GOP is dying to run against Hillary Clinton. Like Don Rickles flaying a heckler, each candidate whacked at Clinton as if she were a pants-suited piñata. When they were done with their one-liners, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee deadpanned: "Look, I like to be funny. There's nothing funny about Hillary Clinton being president."

No, but there's something deeply advantageous to having her as an opponent. So far, the commentary about the Republican offensive against Hillary has focused mostly on how it reflects poorly on the GOP (those Clinton-hating wing nuts are at it again!). What's not been fully grasped is how Hillary gives the GOP its best chance at being the party of change.

Newt Gingrich, for one, has been pointing this out for months, using the May electoral triumph of Nicolas Sarkozy in France as an example. A cabinet minister for the unpopular Jacques Chirac, who'd served as president for a biblically long term of 12 years, Sarkozy ran against his own incumbent party's complaisance as well as his Socialist opponent, Segolene Royal, arguing that she represented a return to a failed past and more of the same.

America isn't France - obviously - but Democrats may be misreading America nonetheless. It seems incandescently clear that voters want a change, and up to now, change meant little more than Democratic victory and no more President Bush. But Democrats got a significant victory in 2006, when they took control of both houses of Congress. And now Congress is even less popular than Bush. In other words, the clamor for change in Washington is much bigger than Bush.

Besides, Bush is leaving no matter what. And unlike every other election since the 1920s, there's no White House-approved candidate in the race. Any Republican will start with 40 percent to 45 percent of the vote in his pocket once he gets the nomination. The question is whether the critical 5 percent to 10 percent of swing voters will think Hillary Clinton represents the sort of change they want.

To wit: Most independents and swing voters want an end to the acrimony and bitterness in Washington - and a candidate they like. Whether that's right or not is irrelevant. That's what they want.

Which Democratic candidate would be most likely to give those voters what they want? Not Hillary, it's safe to say. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jonah Goldberg's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Titans Hillary and Rudy ...
time for a reality check ...

isn't it patently obvious that the Democrats have been playing TASS to the Republican Pravda truth machine for the life of the US "democracy" project. let's prove we can rise above the "big one with no return address": i.e. bird flu, a suitcase nuke, SARS, MRSA, etc. on our own w/o "their" help and while proving the Diebold Conspiracy theorists wrong.

let's vote in a 3rd way from the group of tinfoil mad hatters: Ron Paul, Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, or even Nader, Kucinich. truly none of them could be any worse than CNNFOXBushClintonBushClinton!!! if something happens to our 3rd man in then you'll know it's an act of either the skull or the bones half of the oligarchy ...

we can't sit by idly while O'Reilly and friends make fun of the 3rd way candidates we have who are apparently the only truly right wing Conservatives and left wing Liberals that haven't been bought off by the interlocking corporate directorships that pay Father Bill's and Father Sean's salaries. it goes without saying that Wolfie and Christiane are already bought off by the other half of the Oligarchs!

and what about the neo-Cons are hawks canard ...

if neo-Cons were truly hawks they'd actually enlist and fight in a real war on the side of the US ... instead of leading us into wars on behalf of the national interest of Israel from the neo-Con and Freedom's Watch wings of the hijacked Republican party. it's time for the Liberty sinkers and Saud Kleptocrats to be tossed over the side in favor of the realpolitiks of Buchanan and Paul and stop the pseudo-debate between the neo-Con Rudy and the neo-Con Hillary who both already agree how our peace dividend can be spent in the name of poppy fields and pipelines through Afghanistan with no referendum by the people; who actually have no real Conservative or real Liberal to vote for.

for justpaul
justpaul claims: "The biggest problem that Hillary ad the Democrats face is that they are running against Bush, but Bush isn't running."

In a sense, he is:

Historically, not since 1876 has an unpopular incumbent President been succeeded by someone from his own party. (1876 was the last time--the unpopular Grant was succeeded by Hayes, both Republicans.) Since then, for the last 130 years, whenever the President was highly unpopular, his party lost the White House in the next election.

Evidently what happens is that the voters, frustrated with the incumbent President but unable to punish him because he's not running, end up punishing his party instead and defeating their new candidate.

That's why the Democrats keep harping on Bush even though he's not running. They know their American history. You don't.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.