Hillary Clinton: Betrayed, in the End, by Senate Boys Club?

Options
DarcSkies777
DarcSkies777 Members Posts: 5,600 ✭✭✭
edited March 2010 in The Social Lounge
Hillary Clinton: Betrayed, in the End, by Senate Boys Club?
POSTED: 02/28/10
Hold on, thought I, before shelving two early 2010 books about the 2008 presidential election. There's something to be read and said in the pages of "Game Change" by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin that somehow got lost in translation, even by the authors themselves.

And in "Notes From the Cracked Ceiling," author Anne E. Kornblut makes the case that the national electorate isn't ready for a woman president, judging by her own coverage of Hillary Clinton's campaign for The Washington Post.

Actually, it may be the Washington elected class that's most resistant to a gender game change -- meaning in the 2008 drama, Clinton's own fellow senators. In "Game Change," the U.S. Senate comes across as the highest glass ceiling of all. The boys club -- or gentlemen's club -- that Clinton worked hard to join essentially turned on her early in the game and may have blackballed her chances. The same key members within the club befriended and encouraged Sen. Barack Obama, giving his candidacy a tremendous back-channel boost in the beginning.

A simple truth lies in plain view, like Poe's purloined letter, across these two tomes. To wit, let's not assume it's the national electorate that's so unready for a female president. A fired-up Clinton was catching on pretty good toward the end, winning major primaries in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Texas. But the upper echelons of the political establishment, which she had reason to believe were on her side, had other ideas. "They" decided she was too divisive, even as she competed well in the field.

To a man, many of Clinton's friends and allies in the Senate reached out to the talented but untested freshman senator from Illinois, urging Barack Obama to run for president. Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York was one of these; so was Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. Highly respected Tom Daschle, a former majority leader, urged Obama to seize the moment and promised to advise him. For the most part, these conversations were held in private in "a conspiracy of whispers," as Heilemann and Halperin put it. When the late Sen. Edward Kennedy went public with a full-throated roar of endorsement, then the extent of Obama's support by the clubby Senate Democrats became clear.

For Obama, that was almost as sweet as winning the Iowa caucuses. But for Clinton, it was finding out that "friends" can make the most insidious foes of all.

Was it a betrayal, as the authors call it, by Clinton's Senate colleagues? Perhaps, but it wasn't just politics as usual. I see it in shades of gender as well as politics. Older men often like to champion and mentor younger men who remind them of their youth. Given a choice between anointing a political peer, a woman, and an outstanding younger African American (12 years younger), it wasn't even close. Obama was their pick.

The moral: The glass houses of Congress need more cracking, too, with their ceilings as high as the Capitol dome.

So did she lose in the end because she was a female?

Comments

  • DarcSkies777
    DarcSkies777 Members Posts: 5,600 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    OK I kinda just posted based on the title. But look like just some more whining from the losing side. No proof was offered at all.
  • earth two superman
    earth two superman Members Posts: 17,149 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    she runs in 2012. watch.
  • DarcSkies777
    DarcSkies777 Members Posts: 5,600 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    she runs in 2012. watch.

    By then Obama will have a healthcare bill and the economy will be better but likely not recovered. Unless of course they struck a deal to get her out the way and he promised one term. But she's the backup if the Obama experiment doesnt work out for sure.
  • earth two superman
    earth two superman Members Posts: 17,149 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    My bad, i meant to say 2016, not 12. i doubt ANYONE from obamas camp (and yes, she is obamas close camp now) runs against him. i honestly cant see as of now obama not running or even not winning.
  • DarcSkies777
    DarcSkies777 Members Posts: 5,600 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    O ok...yeah she'll defiantly be running. She's talking all that ? now...but come 2016 they'll give her the "duty to country, first woman president, would you rather a republican stop all our progress" ? and she'll be back in the game and this time with (likely but not guaranteed) Obama's support. And even Southern females will be on the bandwagon.
  • earth two superman
    earth two superman Members Posts: 17,149 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    plus shell still be younger than mccain when he ran in 08 lol
  • DarcSkies777
    DarcSkies777 Members Posts: 5,600 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
  • 313 wayz
    313 wayz Members Posts: 2,179 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    I could see Obama nominating her for the next Supreme Court opening but that's about it, she will be 68 by the time 2016 rolls around, I just dont see her running for office then.
  • Swiffness!
    Swiffness! Members Posts: 10,128 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    Poor Hillary. She only had like, the rest of the Dem establishment riding for her.

    Lady thought she had the nomination in the bag, got complacent, ? up some more, and -surprise!- took the L. Call it Coakley Syndrome.
  • shootemwon
    shootemwon Members Posts: 4,635 ✭✭
    edited February 2010
    Options
    Some people refuse to let go of the fact that Clinton just got out-maneuvered. I remember in November 2007, a friend telling me that as impressive as Obama is, America just isn't going to elect a black president, so he can't win, and as sad as that may be, the Democrats need to be realistic and move forward with the one who can actually get elected, Hillary. A few months later, that same friend was complaining that sexism was costing Hillary the nomination and we can't just let that kind of bigotry define our politics, rather we must confront it direct. Nice double stand from my friend, but even she got over it by the end of 2008.
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited March 2010
    Options
    So did she lose in the end because she was a female?
    she lost because she was (and probably is) an unlikeable ? who felt the nomination was OWED to her. wrong.
  • shootemwon
    shootemwon Members Posts: 4,635 ✭✭
    edited March 2010
    Options
    agreed for the most part

    I thought darcskies was making some sense but anytime jay cosigns a post it loses a lot of credibility
  • shootemwon
    shootemwon Members Posts: 4,635 ✭✭
    edited March 2010
    Options
    cosign .. tu.gif

    i guess i walked right into that one
  • ThaDocta
    ThaDocta Members Posts: 33
    edited March 2010
    Options
    She lost because she is a Clinton, which is to say a lying, cheating, stealing rotten apple whose only motive is her own self-aggrandizement, just like her malignant husband. Period. Put the right woman in on the ballot, and she'll win. And NO, it 'aint Palin. That's another wrong one.

    Obama will do his best to keep hillary in siberia, but she will rise up and challenge him for the nomination unless the country stumbles into some kind of miracle.