While it's too early for 2016, it would hardly be surprising if Hillary Clinton falls short yet again. She's also susceptible to the Roger Mudd question:
Inevitability is evanescent.
3 comments:
First Ringer
said...
The real question is who challenges her?
Unlike 2007, there's a lack of strong internal opponents. Six years ago, Hillary had to contend with the likes of John Edwards, Barack Obama & Bill Richardson. Outside of Elizabeth Warren, who lacks the national profile or similar level of activist zeal as Obama did, I'm hard pressed to name a Democratic candidate who seems likely to push Hillary for the nomination?
Martin O'Malley? Brian Schweitzer? Amy Klobuchar? If they run, I'd assume they're running more to bolster their credentials for a cabinet slot or a future bid.
I don't know that there is a candidate yet who could challenge her, but I expect one to emerge, especially if Hillary starts to sputter in her campaign. Warren is the best bet. The Dems have a shockingly poor bench — in an ordinary cycle, someone as daft as Martin O'Malley wouldn't get a sniff.
3 comments:
The real question is who challenges her?
Unlike 2007, there's a lack of strong internal opponents. Six years ago, Hillary had to contend with the likes of John Edwards, Barack Obama & Bill Richardson. Outside of Elizabeth Warren, who lacks the national profile or similar level of activist zeal as Obama did, I'm hard pressed to name a Democratic candidate who seems likely to push Hillary for the nomination?
Martin O'Malley? Brian Schweitzer? Amy Klobuchar? If they run, I'd assume they're running more to bolster their credentials for a cabinet slot or a future bid.
I don't know that there is a candidate yet who could challenge her, but I expect one to emerge, especially if Hillary starts to sputter in her campaign. Warren is the best bet. The Dems have a shockingly poor bench — in an ordinary cycle, someone as daft as Martin O'Malley wouldn't get a sniff.
The Democrats have about the same bench strength as Cuba.
Post a Comment