December 7, 2003
LIKE ALL HIS WOMEN, SHE'S EXPENDABLE:
Hillary's road to Boston (Dateline D.C., 12/7/03, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review)
The strength in Hillary's campaign comes from a very political lady, Ellen R. Malcolm, who was the founder, in 1985, of the aptly named EMILY's List. This acronym tells us what we need to know: "Early Money is Like Yeast." Malcolm cheerfully explains, "It makes the dough rise!"In its 18 years of life, EMILY-supported women candidates have won 42 seats in the House of Representatives, six U.S. Senate seats and three governor's mansions. EMILY claims U.S. Sens. Barbara Mikulski, Dianne Feinstein, Patty Murray, Mary Landrieu and a score of congressional people. The list has about 73,000 members and in 2003 raised $23 million. But don't be surprised to find that every one of these ladies is of the Democrat persuasion; after all, Ellen Malcolm is one of the grande dames of that party.
In the early 1970s, Ellen, too young then to know better, worked at Common Cause and was later rewarded by President Jimmy Carter with a job in the White House in its consumer-affairs office. When Jimmy went back to his peanuts, EMILY took over Ms. Malcolm, who coined the phrase "Don't get mad! Get elected!"
Which brings us to a new pro-Hillary group that is doing just what she wants -- attacking George Bush, and attempting to diminish his lead in the polls. This new group, America Coming Together, or ACT, is led by the one and only Ellen Malcolm. And she has help beyond the expectations of a political fund-raiser. Rallying around the Anyone but Bush cause is billionaire financier George Soros and his good friend Peter Lewis, chairman of the board of the Progressive Corporation. They each gave $10 million. Other contributions in the millions of dollars came from liberal and Left groupies, such as Lewis and Dorothy Cullman; Robbie McKay, a big name in the "motor-voter" campaigns; and Patricia Bauman, who is still hankering after a job in the environmental protection world.
ACT is well on its way to filling a $75 million campaign chest when it will begin to use the money in 17 states in the largest field operation that has ever been seen in America. It's a Democrat's dream campaign, stirring up voters on what they claim to be bread-and-butter issues that voters care about.
ACT's planners are almost as interesting as their money people, with many of them coming from the AFL-CIO and the Clinton White House. The manager of their political program and chief executive officer is Steve Rosenthal, who managed the political programs of the AFL-CIO for the past seven years. He is joined by the Sierra Club Director, Carl Pope; Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union; and Gina Glanz, who was once a campaign manager for Bill Bradley.
Then, to top off this array of talent, we have Bill Clinton, Hillary, and their legal genius, Harold Ickes.
But money is all important and these Democrats appear to have cornered the market. There is a new tax-exempt foundation in the District of Columbia, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation. It has been busy creating an infrastructure for the treatment of HIV/AIDS cases, has just consummated a major deal with drug companies in India, and has received a $3 million grant from George Soros, plus undisclosed sums from computer king Bill Gates.
Next on the hand-out list is Clinton's former chief of staff John Podesta, who now is running a Washington public affairs company, teaching at Georgetown University Law Center and running a vicious anti-Bush Internet lobbying group, MoveOn.Org, which has a membership list of 1.8 million people. Despite these clowns being able to raise some $7 million in a few days from his own many financial connections, Podesta was happy to receive $2.5 million and change from Soros.
An interesting thing has happened this week, as Ms Clinton, who had been playing nice, started criticizing the President in such a personal and partisan way as to make it appear she doesn't really care about being an effective Senator and working with the GOP any more. This suggests that the Clinonistas may well have determined that the Democrats can not withstand the kind of party crushing loss that Howard Dean is leading them towards and that their stalking horse, Wesley Clark, has shown himself incompetent to stave off. This brings into play an odd dynamic.
You'd think someone as politically astute as Bill Clinton would caution his wife that she can't win in '04, that he's serve as the sensible brake on her ambition and stop up the honeyed words that others are pouring in her ears. However, there's ample reason to believe that their politics are sufficiently divergent that he doesn't view her as his heir anyway, and would be perfectly willing to sacrifice her career this time around, on the assumption she'd at least keep the Party viable, so that a true successor has a realistic shot in '08--maybe Bill Richardson?
Posted by Orrin Judd at December 7, 2003 11:58 AM...or she and her handlers just think that the shrillness on the left has gotten so loud her voice in 2003 will be completely forgotten by the time 2008 rolls around.
Unless Hillary begins altering her votice record on the war on terror in Congress -- which is the only thing the majority of voters will notice and/or care about five years from now -- I think any statments she makes today are just an effort to assure supporters that she'll still really on their side despite what lever she may have flipped in the Senate chamber. And it will be interesting to see how much of the money ACT raises actually goes into the 2004 campaign if she doesn't run, or if it just gets rolled over to fund her 2008 efforts, which AFAIK would be the all-time record for long-range presidential campaign fundraising.
Posted by: John at December 7, 2003 12:44 PMPersonally I think the idea that Hillary is a viable presidential candidate is a fantasy. Too large a portion of the electorate distrusts or actively despises her. In addition, we are in a war for the forseeable future, and voters aren't going to elect a female CIC unless she's one tough, patriotic, not-afraid-to-fight babe, a la Thatcher.
Posted by: PapayaSF at December 7, 2003 2:32 PMEvan Bayh in 2008. (Then again, Indiana is know for producing Vice Presidents.)
And let's not forget that St. Hillary has to get reelected in 2006.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at December 7, 2003 2:34 PM Bill didn't want Hillary to get to the NY Senate Seat because he saw her as his heir, but simply because it was the payment for her silence and support on other misdeeds, most women in her profession have to settle for $100 and the hotel room, she gets a Senate seat. There's no evidence that Bill would support Hillary any more than any other Democrat.
A presidential campaign,press attention,speeches,cheering crowds,interns and free food?
Oh man,Bill is,like,sooo there.
Posted by: M. at December 7, 2003 4:36 PMIt'll be Hill and Bill (Richardson) in 2004. She can win if the media blitz is so effective that Bush can't overcome it. The Dems don't have to tell the truth or anything near it. It'll be all systems go.
Do Republicans have the stomach for an all out war with the most shameless creatures in history? Do they even have the talent needed to combat the incessant barrage from all sides. The left have millions of dollars that don't need to be accounted for? I don't get it, but I'm sure it's all legit.
Second scenario, the dems stay on the sane side of the road on political ads and Soros flatters McCain into running as a third party which he bankrolls. The media will give him a wonderful welcome and praise him to the sky. He'll be everyone's darling and he'll be promised all kinds of goodies, Sec'y of State, whatever his heart desires until after the election, then he'll find out what happens to Hillary's friends when she doesn't need them anymore.
Erp, I think you're doing a bit of 'living in the past'.
I don't think that "media blitz" can be what you speak of. This very Internet (blogs in particular), Fox, and radio have reached enough critical masss that the big media can blitz all they want.... they may even just lose more authority than they gain while doing so. Witness the LA Times crusade against Arnold writ large.
If, as many of us predict, both the economy and Iraq are in much better shape by next fall, the mass media will literally be in the throes of the kind of crisis of credibility that the Catholic church is in now, and that the US government was in in the '70's, as millions of Americans process how much the big media and their 1968-ism have failed to address, explain, or even be relevant to, the 21st century and the War on Terror. Their days of the unquestioned dominance of themselves and their 1968 paradigm are over, thank God, and Bush being both cause and effect of that is one more reason they hate him.
As for Demo money, sure, but the GOP is lacking for neither funds nor talent (un-named, lower level talent in particular). The GOP has spent 40 years out of power pumping it's 'non-state' muscles, in the form of think tanks, journals, and grass roots organizations. The Dems have spent most of that time in power, with their ideas in the sterile bubble of academia. The fact that both have been punctured so brutally is why they are so much at sea right now. They simply are not honed with the skills to address government from the outside, and their ideas have not suffered the rigorous challenge necessary to keep them lean and effective.
I also doubt McCain would do as you write, particularily with the Democrats in the appalling philosophical shape they are in right now. He won't jump aboard a train wreck.
Now, for God's sake Republicans, do NOT get complacent, or we will have our heads handed to us, and rightly so. But I'm not losing sleep over your scenario. The fact that it is extremely unlikely is why the Democrats are so incandescently out of their heads with rage right now. Their "entitlement" to the world you describe is being eroded daily.
Posted by: Andrew X at December 7, 2003 6:00 PMMcCain as a third-party candidate just guarantees a crusher Bush win. Bush has nearly unanimous support among Repubs and conservatives, two groups that already suspect McCain and would despise him as a third-party candidate. So McCain would take votes only from the Dem candidate. But it's not going to happen, anyway, because Everest-ego McCain doesn't want to lose to Bush twice.
Hillary won't run, either, because the economy is looking too good for 2004. She'll wait to battle Jeb in 2008.
Posted by: Casey Abell at December 7, 2003 7:26 PMBill isn't going to dump Hillary: she is his connection to the juice. But if she wants to be President, she is going to have to dump him. Otherwise, he will get the adulation and the money (and the sex). If she wants to go the 1600 again, she needs to be the straw that stirs the drink. She needs to cut him off once and for all. But can she?
Posted by: jim hamlen at December 7, 2003 8:41 PMI hope that Bush can stay focused on the issues.
Let the Democrats do the flailing, and let them spend as much of Soros's cash as they want. And maybe a few eyebrows will be raised along the way....
Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 8, 2003 7:30 AMAndrew X
Great analysis!
Stay on your message against complacency.
The Media blitz began months ago.
Hillary will run if Iraq destabilizes. Leftists in Europe will demonstrate for her unless they can be controlled from within. NPR and the BBC will continue to drum things up. The French Govt. is getting involved.
Much of the above will eventually backfire on the Demoparts.
But let no vote be left behind!
Posted by: genecis at December 8, 2003 10:27 AM