6 December 2004
The Big She's plans
Scenario: Senator Clinton runs for re-election in 2006, knowing full well she's going to run for President in 2008. What's wrong with this picture?
Nothing, says David Limbaugh:
This may surprise you, but I don't think it's terrible if Hillary does run for re-election to her Senate seat in 2006 with every intention of not serving out her term, especially if she discloses her intent. She has every right to run and the New Yorkers have every right to elect her knowing that it may be temporary. In fact, I'll even go so far as to say that it will help Hillary to stay in the Senate mix, if she does intend to go for the big one.
None of this is to say that I won't fervently oppose this uber-lib feminist for either or both positions, because I will. But let's be done with this idle speculation about whether her re-election to the Senate in 2006 will deter her from a presidential run in 2008. It won't in a million years, even if she promises under oath that she'll complete her Senate term no matter what. It's ridiculous to think otherwise. It's also ridiculous to think it will matter if she reneges on a promise to serve out for full term. Ridiculous. It will not sway .00000000000001% of the voters of NY, much less those of any other state.
I think Mr Limbaugh is exaggerating a bit. New York has about eleven million voters; .00000000000001 percent of that number would get you down to the level of mitochondria, unless he's counting Michael Moore. But I agree with his larger point: it doesn't make any meaningful difference to voters whether Mrs Clinton is still in the Senate or not when (as distinguished from if) she mounts her Presidential bid.