“Forget the past, let’s try and move on.”
This is apparently the message the Democratic Party is subliminally sending to American voters.
Seemingly mere months after President Barack Obama’s second term victory, he will hold a private lunch for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the overwhelming favorite to take the party’s torch from our current president.
While many believe that our president’s second term is already a complete disaster, the party is in a conceivably hectic state.
Scandal after scandal has emerged from Obama’s victorious presidential run.
While many believed the Republicans were in a state of regression because of the minority and youth vote after their loss, the Democrats are now giving reason to believe they may have the upper hand — at least on some issues — in this coming election.
Instead of distancing themselves from politicians enveloped in political scandal, they are apparently choosing Clinton — the subject of the infamous Benghazi fracas — as the next-in-line for the throne.
Yet, perhaps this is a bold, strategic move that the Republicans will play right into. Time and time again, the Democrats have proven themselves the more strategically subtle political party, and choosing Hillary to run is no coincidence.
Let me explain.
First, there’s the money, the connections and the power.
You’d have to be politically lost to conclude that this move, if it happens, isn’t connected to what Clinton has already accomplished in politics and the connections she has made along the way. Obama and Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have praised her, and even Republicans like Paul Ryan and Bob Corker have jumped onto the “Praise Hillary” boat. She’s held politically important offices such as Secretary of State and has an impressive résumé.
Next comes the reputation.
She’s linked to Bill Clinton, a popular president, and a president who has been credited for being financially astute while in office more than once (while also working with a Republican Congress). If the Republicans attack Clinton for fiscal irresponsibility, this is an easy and effective card for the Clinton campaign to use.
Lastly, comes her involvement with Benghazi, and this is key. This, if she is nominated, is arguably the reason she’ll be elected.
If nominated, the Republicans will spend so much time linking her to Benghazi that they’ll forget about attacking her policy initiatives. They’ll forget about attacking Obama’s second term. They’ll be rounded up into a corner shouting at the top of their lungs at one political scandal — one — instead of engaging in the big picture questions.
Have the Republicans shown any political astuteness in the new century? Have they shown us any reason to convince us that they won’t do this?
Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I believe Clinton can be beaten the old-fashioned way; she can be defeated by engaging in political discussion where her ideas — the ideas of the Democratic party, most likely — will not emerge victorious.
Yet the Republicans won’t do this.
They’re in the process of soul searching, and they are a disunited political group trying to find the middle ground between the rising libertarianism that is sweeping the youth vote and the older voters who, regarding social issues, draw a totalitarian line in the sand.
Way back before the Obama victory, I predicted that even if Obama won the Republicans would get the last laugh.
Nearly a year after this prediction, I’m going to correct myself: If Hillary is nominated, Hillary will win. She’ll get the youth vote, she’ll get the minority vote and she’ll get the women’s vote. If Hillary is nominated, the Republicans will play right into the Democrat’s hands.
Consider this a warning, GOP: Engage in the issues, and finish up your soul-searching.
Your time is running out.
Send Sean your 2016 presidential election predictions at spmccaul@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @sean_mccauley
