By R. Brownell
Many pundits and commentators around the country were quick to announce Hillary as the de facto nominee for the Democratic Party, in very much the same way that Rand Paul is seen as the Republican favorite amongst conservative constituents. The problem is, there truly is no way that Clinton will be able to combat effectively her rival Democrat opponents. This time the primaries will be even more brutal than her 2008 campaign, before she was Secretary of State (USSOS) during the Obama administration.
The elephant in the room is the long record of scandals that both Hillary and Bill Clinton have carried with them for almost two decades. from the terrorist attack in Benghazi, the criminal accusations regarding Whitewater, the recent hard drive incident, and allegations of foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation made during her time as USSOS, Clinton has a negative track record no candidate would pass on in order to use as attacks to eliminate the competition.
Much like Herman Cain’s alleged infidelity cost him his shot at the 2012 GOP nomination, its easy for even one small scandal to snowball quickly. In Hillary’s case though, her Pandora’s Box would be open far in advance of the primary season, giving her opponents more than enough time to put forth a strategy in place to discredit her immediately as being to scandal ridden to carry the party to the White House. Additionally, much like Jeb Bush’s issue with trying to shake off his family legacy, Bill’s past discretions alone are enough bait to lure an opportunistic fish of any size alone.
Speaking of Jeb Bush, recent polls have shown that American voters want change, not revolutionary change, but want a race that won’t be between two families that have dictated political discussion since the 1980’s, a race that would have either Bush, or Clinton running. This concern automatically puts Clinton at a disadvantage, as seen in recent attacks by former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who said in a recent interview that the presidency isn’t “a crown to be passed between two families”.
Additionally, foreign policy, an issue that will take center stage during this next election, will be another issue not on Hillary’s side. Whether it was that 2003 Iraq vote, or her position on boots on the ground in Syria to combat ISIS, Clinton is far from being the candidate of peace. According to a recent article by The Nation online magazine, liberals would have a hard time defending her anti peace record:
American civic nationalism…. above all, depict the United States as—in one of Clinton’s favorite phrases—the “indispensable nation,” innately good (if sometimes misguided), with the right and duty to lead humankind and therefore, when necessary, to crush any opposition. It is the strength and centrality of these nationalist myths that have prevented our elites and the American public from learning or remembering the lessons of Vietnam—a failure that helped pave the way for the disaster of the 2003 Iraq invasion, the consequences of which are still unfolding in the Middle East today. And as Clinton’s entire record—all her writings and all the writings about her—show, she has made herself a captive of those nationalist myths beyond any possibility of escape.
Apart from strictly foreign policy, Clinton is no longer resonating with true post-modern, progressive, liberal Democrats of the Obama era. Populist Senator Bernie Sanders is gaining rapid grassroots support after announcing his presidential candidacy, his involvement in the primaries might not result in him getting the nomination, but it will definitely force Hillary to choose whether or not she will allow Sanders socialist platform to pull her farther to the left, or defend the rationale for her domestic and economic policies, which are following the template of her husband’s policies from the 1990’s.
If policy and philosophy isn’t reason enough, millennial voters who grew up in the age of Obama will assumingly drift naturally to either a charismatic speaker like Sanders, or someone younger and more energetic, like soon to be candidate Martin O’Malley. Hillary’s age will be used in much of the way John McCain’s seniority was used against him when he faced then Senator Obama in 2008. A recent article from the Washington Post reiterated this point :
her age and health are certain to be talked about, given that she would be vying to become the second-oldest person in history to be elected. She would be 69, only a little younger than Ronald Reagan when he won his first term in 1980.
Therefore, the odds of Hillary Clinton successfully obtaining the Democratic nomination are slim, or truly impossible.