If the smoke clears from the conflagration ignited by the ferocity of the Democratic presidential primary season; and Senator Obama is left standing as the Democratic presidential nominee, then Senator Clinton could launch an Independent presidential campaign like billionaire Ross Perot in the 1992 Presidential election.
In the event that Senator Clinton is unable to persuade the super delegates that she is more electable than her opponent, then her chances become slim in being able to grasp the brass ring. The nomination would be out of reach for her, but not necessarily the keys to The White House.
The time might come when it becomes clear that the feud between Clinton and Obama has fractured the Democratic Party so very badly, that the Senator from New York might be able to persuade her supporters, who may feel bitter and disenfranchised, to support her as an Independent presidential candidate. Such inter-Party bitterness might create a unique opportunity in U.S. presidential elections; a successful bid by a candidate outside of the dualopoly.
Such a candidate would have to posses certain attributes. This candidate would have to have the ability to gain the support of Independents, moderates, and centrists. Reserves of vast financial resources would also be a prerequisite. This candidate would have to have sufficient name recognition and an appeal that are equal to the nominees. The candidate would need to emphasis change, leadership, and a certain level of gravitas that would convince individuals to sway away from the comforting caress of the Republicans and Democrats.
Senator Hillary Clinton received support from Liberal Republicans, Democrats, moderates, independents and centrists alike in her bids for the U.S. Senate. The former First Lady has a personal fortune estimated well into the millions of dollars resulting from her husband’s speaking engagements and her well -received book. The Senator is known around the world thanks to her time in The White House alongside her President-husband; therefore, she possesses name recognition in spades. She has a larger than life persona that could persuade party loyalists to break away and support an Independent bid. As Senator in a state that is the media capital of the world, Senator Clinton knows how to utilize the media to disseminate his message.
Before you dismiss the idea out of hand, please recall the presidential election of 1992, when a charismatic Texas billionaire named Ross Perot capitalized on the frustration that the American people were feeling with the two major parties and how they conduct themselves. As Mr. Paul F. Boller Jr. reminds us in “Presidential Campaigns”:
On election day, in the largest voter turnout since 1960, Governor Clinton won the election with 43 percent of the popular votes to Bush’s 38 percent and Perot’s 19 percent. His electoral victory was more impressive: 370 votes to Bush’s 168. Perot won no electoral votes, but his share of the popular votes was the largest for an Independent candidate since Theodore Roosevelt, running as a Progressive, took 27 percent of the popular votes in 1912.
Senator Clinton could win electoral votes in states such as New York, Arkansas, and other states that contain Democrats and Independents dissatisfied with Senator Obama.
With an Independent run, Senator Clinton could reach across ideological boundaries and be an attractive candidate to an electorate disgruntled and dissatisfied with the elephants and the jackasses.
Senator Clinton should play to win the game she’s in right now, but if she’s ultimately forced to cash in her chips in the Democratic Party primary, perhaps the former First Lady should roll the dice and see what happens. Ross Perot gambled, and almost changed history.
In the event that Senator Clinton is unable to persuade the super delegates that she is more electable than her opponent, then her chances become slim in being able to grasp the brass ring. The nomination would be out of reach for her, but not necessarily the keys to The White House.
The time might come when it becomes clear that the feud between Clinton and Obama has fractured the Democratic Party so very badly, that the Senator from New York might be able to persuade her supporters, who may feel bitter and disenfranchised, to support her as an Independent presidential candidate. Such inter-Party bitterness might create a unique opportunity in U.S. presidential elections; a successful bid by a candidate outside of the dualopoly.
Such a candidate would have to posses certain attributes. This candidate would have to have the ability to gain the support of Independents, moderates, and centrists. Reserves of vast financial resources would also be a prerequisite. This candidate would have to have sufficient name recognition and an appeal that are equal to the nominees. The candidate would need to emphasis change, leadership, and a certain level of gravitas that would convince individuals to sway away from the comforting caress of the Republicans and Democrats.
Senator Hillary Clinton received support from Liberal Republicans, Democrats, moderates, independents and centrists alike in her bids for the U.S. Senate. The former First Lady has a personal fortune estimated well into the millions of dollars resulting from her husband’s speaking engagements and her well -received book. The Senator is known around the world thanks to her time in The White House alongside her President-husband; therefore, she possesses name recognition in spades. She has a larger than life persona that could persuade party loyalists to break away and support an Independent bid. As Senator in a state that is the media capital of the world, Senator Clinton knows how to utilize the media to disseminate his message.
Before you dismiss the idea out of hand, please recall the presidential election of 1992, when a charismatic Texas billionaire named Ross Perot capitalized on the frustration that the American people were feeling with the two major parties and how they conduct themselves. As Mr. Paul F. Boller Jr. reminds us in “Presidential Campaigns”:
On election day, in the largest voter turnout since 1960, Governor Clinton won the election with 43 percent of the popular votes to Bush’s 38 percent and Perot’s 19 percent. His electoral victory was more impressive: 370 votes to Bush’s 168. Perot won no electoral votes, but his share of the popular votes was the largest for an Independent candidate since Theodore Roosevelt, running as a Progressive, took 27 percent of the popular votes in 1912.
Senator Clinton could win electoral votes in states such as New York, Arkansas, and other states that contain Democrats and Independents dissatisfied with Senator Obama.
With an Independent run, Senator Clinton could reach across ideological boundaries and be an attractive candidate to an electorate disgruntled and dissatisfied with the elephants and the jackasses.
Senator Clinton should play to win the game she’s in right now, but if she’s ultimately forced to cash in her chips in the Democratic Party primary, perhaps the former First Lady should roll the dice and see what happens. Ross Perot gambled, and almost changed history.
Boller, Paul F. Jr. Presidential Campaigns. Oxford University Press Inc 1984.
Ryan Christiano.
Ryan Christiano.
No comments:
Post a Comment