Patrick Buchanan on MSNBC just said that although he expects Hillary to campaign hard for Obama, she won't shed any tears if he loses. He recalled that Nixon campaigned "even harder than Goldwater" for Goldwater in 1964, but Nixon was not at all upset that Goldwater lost, because that loss opened up 1968 for Nixon. Buchanan thinks the same applies to now and 2012 for Hillary Clinton, and also offered that she's therefore not likely go for the jugular with McCain this year.
Keith Olbermann a few minutes later responded that Hillary cares too much about the issues to do anything other than all-out campaign for Obama.
Let's sketch out the various slightly but significantly different scenarios that could play out here:
1. Hillary campaigns hard for Obama, but does not go all-out, because she would not be unhappy if he loses.
2. Hillary campaigns all-out for Obama, but would not be unhappy if he loses.
3. Hillary campaigns all-out for Obama, and would be unhappy if he loses, because she cares so deeply about the issues he and she believe in.
Which strikes you as closest to the truth? The question is somewhat cynical, ultimately unanswerable (for who can know anyone's true motives), but nonetheless interesting...
See also: Hillary Speaks Powerfully at Democratic Convention, In a Scene for the Ages
Infinite Regress Democratic Convention Coverage from Day One: Olbermann to Scarborough on MSNBC: "Jesus, Joe, Get a Shovel!" ... Ted Kennedy at 2008 Democratic Convention: JFK Would Be Smiling ... Michelle Obama's Speech: Bringing Home America
2 comments:
I agree with Pat Buchanan about Hillary not minding an Obama loss (I also agree with Pat on foreign policy). I want Obama to win, but not because I like his policies, but because I want the Republicans to be taught a lesson. They have strayed from their conservative roots, with liberal mccain even considering lieberman as a VP proving this. I am a Conservative Libertarian who supported Ron Paul and I was completely upset by the media's mistreatment of him, and the party's mistreatment of him at the state conventions. I hope Obama will try a more diplomatic foreign policy, and completely remove our troops from Iraq. However, I get nervous when he talks about adding more troops in Afghanistan and taking nothing off the table in regards to Iran. But hey, anything is better than warmongering Mccain, right? Also, professor, I was wondering if you were going to make a blog post on your thoughts of Ron Paul's upcoming "mini-convention" (http://www.rallyfortherepublic.com).
Interesting blog by the way.
Glad you're finding Infinite Regress of interest, Henry.
As you probably know, I wrote lots of blog posts and gave several lectures about the media's outrageous treatment of Ron Paul - just look under his name in the Index to the right.
I'll probably take a look at Ron Paul's upcoming "mini-convention," but most of my energy now will be devoted to commenting on the election, and doing what I can to help Obama win.
Once Obama's in the White House, I'll pick up my campaign to get the First Amendment, and the Constitution in general (including its Declaration of War clause) more respected.
Happy to have your comments, any time.
Post a Comment