Hillary Clinton is all set to step down in 2024 in a breach created by an unpopular Joe Biden and an unstable Kamala Harris, according to a new op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by pollster Doug Schoen and former New York City Council President Andrew Stein. are deployed.
"Several circumstances—President Biden's low approval rating, doubts over his ability to run for re-election at 82, Vice President Kamala Harris's unpopularity, and the absence of another strong Democrat to lead the ticket in 2024—have led to a party, which Mrs. Clinton could practically fill," both write. "He is already in an advantageous position to be the 2024 Democratic nominee."
Before we go any further, it's worth noting that neither Schönen nor Stein have sterling credentials as Democrats. Schoen worked for former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, while Stein supported none other than Donald Trump in the 2016 election, wait for it, Hillary Clinton.
From his background you should stop his analysis of a) his intentions and b) the state of the Democratic Party and the region of 2024.
But, let's put that aside and consider his case on merits for the sake of argument. The core of his argument is that:
a) Clinton is an experienced hand in government and national politics.
b) She can contest election as Parivartan candidate.
c) She is leaving a signal that she wants to run again.
Let's break down - and dismiss - these ideas one by one.
1. Clinton has the right experience to be president. Yes it's true! Clinton's resume—Secretary of State, New York Senator, First Lady—is undoubtedly one of the most impressive of any politician in any party. Here's the problem: This was true when she ran for president in 2016 and even in 2008 when she hadn't become secretary of state yet! And, breaking news, he lost both of those campaigns. What has changed then and now? Schön and Stein would argue that the moment – as the country continues to grapple with the Covid-19 outbreak, supply chain issues, the disastrous withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan – all point to the need for a steady hand at the top. But, isn't that what voters chose the current president for? Yes Yes it is. And while Clinton and Biden aren't carbon copies of each other, their relevant experience is remarkably similar—long careers in the field of public policy in Washington.
2. Clinton is the candidate for change. Here's the Schoen/Stein argument; "If Democrats lose control of Congress in 2022, Mrs. Clinton could use the party's loss as a basis to run for president again, allowing her to claim the title of 'change candidate. uh, what? Will Republicans winning the House (and perhaps the Senate) allow Clinton - who spent more than three decades as a pillar of the Washington establishment - to position herself as the change candidate? how exactly? There is no scenario I can imagine in which Clinton would be the candidate for change. Her background is simply too Washington (and politics) heavy. Furthermore, Schoen and Stein just argued that Clinton had the right experience for the job. So, how can she run as an experience candidate and change agent? I just don't think that the Republicans who won control of Congress in 2022 suddenly turn Clinton into a transformation candidate along the lines of Barack Obama's 2008 campaign. (Worth noting again: Clinton lost that primary to Obama.)
3. Clinton is giving some indication that she wants to run. The evidence Shown and Stein provided for this claim is an interview Clinton gave to NBC's Willie Geist late last year. Speaking of the position of the Democratic Party, she said this: "I think it's time for some careful thought about what wins elections, not just dark blue districts where there's one Democrat and one liberal Democrat, or the so-called progressives." The Democrats are going to win." Which is interesting! But it seems like too thin a grease to hang on to the idea that Clinton, as Scion and Stein write, "will seize the opportunity to run for president again if an inauguration presents itself." It's also worth noting here that Clinton said in 2017 that her career as an "active politician" was now over.
Look, the election of Trump in 2016 taught me to never dismiss any idea - no matter how strange it is - as impossible. Which means I'm unwilling to say that there is about a 0.0% chance of Clinton running in 2024.
What I can tell is that this Sean/Stein op-ed does little to convince me that:
a) She will run.
b) Running him would be a good idea.
c) She will be in a good position to win.