Althouse: "Yes, the debate was comfortable to Democrats concerned about their front-runner, but it should also have been worrisome to Democrats concerned about their bench."

October 17, 2015

"Yes, the debate was comfortable to Democrats concerned about their front-runner, but it should also have been worrisome to Democrats concerned about their bench."

"'The fact she did well should surprise no one,' a Biden activist told me. 'If she didn’t do well against those guys, then God help our party.” If something serious were to happen to Clinton — self-inflicted or not — the party would be entering a presidential race on favorable terrain but with a substantial talent problem. Martin O’Malley presented no rationale for a campaign; Jim Webb sounded bitter and bizarre; Lincoln Chafee at times appeared confused why he was even onstage. Sanders electrified his core supporters but didn’t suggest any newfound ability to sell his far-left platform to the general public. In a scenario where a Clinton campaign implodes, Democrats will again be desperate for a new candidate and will again review the options. Al Gore’s name will be floated. 'Al Gore is doing nothing,' said a Democrat who sits on a board with him. Same with John Kerry. 'John has not given the slightest indication he would do this,' Bob Shrum, who ran Kerry’s 2004 campaign, told me. What will be real is Biden."

From "We Are Already Months Into the Biden Campaign," by Gabriel Sherman in New York Magazine.

23 comments:

Jaq said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/17/15, 6:02 AM
Jaq said...: Barack Obama has taken a wrecking ball to the Democrat Party.

His refusal to compromise and insistence on pushing the country left, no matter what centrists, let alone the opposition thinks, has led to this. He bet that he could just push and there would be no consequences. Instead he finds the party out of power in the House, likely for a long time, and if the Democrats do win the Senate back, (Don't look for Hillary pant suit tails) it won't be by much, and probably will only last one cycle.

The Democrat's almost perfect message discipline has led to a complete lack of diversity in their party and has stunted leadership development.

I know, I know, "Thanks for your concern Tim," but I don't think anybody can show me that it is not true.; 10/17/15, 6:06 AM
traditionalguy said...: Ed Klein is right again.; 10/17/15, 6:28 AM
Humperdink said...: It's Hillary all the way now. If HRC tanked in the debate, Biden would be in. She didn't and he's not.; 10/17/15, 6:33 AM
Michael K said...: The Democrats have bet a lot, the house, on the theory that the country has moved left. The loss of the House and Senate has not convinced them they are wrong. The loss of state legislatures and governorships has not convince them they are wrong.

Obama had a unique appeal to blacks and to the young libertarian left that saw him as a symbol. The fact that he has brought us to a real risk of nuclear war in the near future has not dawned on that "top and bottom" coalition.

The "Gods of the Copybook Headings" are coming fast.; 10/17/15, 6:33 AM
Hagar said...: It is not about "the Democrats."
It is about Obama, and he will not want Hillary! to succeed him because Clinton Inc. will go the Clinton way and not his.
If Biden is all there is, so be it, and he will try to leave a set of regents to manage Biden.; 10/17/15, 6:47 AM
campy said...: "The Democrats have bet a lot, the house, on the theory that the country has moved left."

No, the democrats realize that it doesn't matter where the country is. When the votes are counted next year, their candidate will become president — by any means necessary. Simple as that.

The answers here seem so obvious to me. I don't know why so much discussion is needed.; 10/17/15, 7:19 AM
Hagar said...: Not necessarily.
2016 may be the year they give an election and nobody comes.

Obama may figure the odds of the next president being Democrat are slim, and the party ought to concentrate on getting the Senate back so that the republicans cannot pass any legislation to undo his "legacy."

With a really low turnout, I think the election results may be entirely unpredictable. A real crap shoot in every sense.; 10/17/15, 7:41 AM
Fen said...: "the party would be entering a presidential race on favorable terrain"

Yah that's the same thing you said before you got steamrolled last election. Please stay in your echo chamber and listen to the yes men.; 10/17/15, 7:52 AM
Fen said...: the party ought to concentrate on getting the Senate back so that the republicans cannot pass any legislation to undo his "legacy."

Nah, Mitch has already promised he won't do that, in exchange for the promise of future negotiations. At Martha's Vineyard. At a better table closer to the Cool Kids. Maybe even next to Oprah.; 10/17/15, 7:54 AM
Hagar said...: I also think the electorate is unstable. 2016 may be the first time in U.S. history that some random event somewhere in the world - at home or abroad - suddenly may turn everything upside down. May not even be a big thing.; 10/17/15, 7:58 AM
Bay Area Guy said...: Over thinking. It's hard for any party, in the modern era, to win 3 straight Prez elections. Reagan 1&2,Bush (80-88) did it, and nobody else has since FDR in 1940.

Instead, at best, the incumbent party can muster up a close loss (see Humphey '68; see Ford '76; see Gore '00)

So, from a purely historical vantage point, the GOP would seem to have the edge in '16. This may be why 19 candidates ran - they believed that winning the GOP nomination was tantamount to winning the general election. Big historical tailwind.

Why this occurs is open for debate: moderate GOP types will say that the independent swing vote gets sick of the incumbent party, and "swings" away from it. Jeb Bush probably buys this theory. On the other hand, Trump may have disrupted this natural swing with his boisterous entry into the fray.

My thought has always been that Hillary is and remains a formidable candidate; that there's no way on earth that Obama's DOJ will indict her; that she is a virtual lock to win the Dem nomination and that, regardless of the day-to- day headlines, the election is basically 50-50, like 2000.

My 2 cents.; 10/17/15, 8:53 AM
rehajm said...: Hagar said...
Not necessarily.
2016 may be the year they give an election and nobody comes.

Obama may figure the odds of the next president being Democrat are slim, and the party ought to concentrate on getting the Senate back so that the republicans cannot pass any legislation to undo his "legacy."

With a really low turnout, I think the election results may be entirely unpredictable. A real crap shoot in every sense.

All of this. 1. It's yet to be seen if urban minorities will be motivated to vote for geriatric old white people, even one Obama says they should vote for. 2. Economics will undo Obama's legacy even with a political victory. 3. Stat geeks are pulling their hair out over recent election polling her and overseas. Carp shoot indeed.; 10/17/15, 9:07 AM
rehajm said...: hehe- carp shoot..; 10/17/15, 9:07 AM
Gahrie said...: How about this for a conspiracy?

Hillary runs for president, and wins. The Democratic electors go to Washington D.C. and vote for .....Gore. or Warren. Or Biden. Or hell anyone else.

It would be entirely legal and Constitutionally legitimate.; 10/17/15, 10:41 AM
Gahrie said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/17/15, 10:45 AM
Gahrie said...: Barack Obama has taken a wrecking ball to the Democrat Party.

It's not just Obama. This entire generation of Democratic leadership is responsible. Hell the only Democratic "leader" who can't collect retirement is DWS, and she's battyer than a church steeple.

The Democrats have been savaged at the State and local level. There is just no farm team.

The young Democratic activists are all extremists...the SJW, Si Se Puede and Black Lives Matter crowds.; 10/17/15, 10:47 AM
JAORE said...: When Slow Joe (Creepy Ol' Joe, the Gaffe-tastic Joe, Plagiarism R' Us Joe, Obama's Best Life Insurance Policy Joe) is the hoped for savior if Hilary falls by the way side........; 10/17/15, 11:25 AM
YoungHegelian said...: Hillary doesn't have to be indicted to be declared guilty in the court of public opinion. If it appears that the Obama administration is quashing an indictment, made public in a big way, by e.g. repeated FBI leaks to the press, a high level FBI resignation in protest, then HRC is toast, as is the Presidential aspirations of the Democratic Party. Her campaign has the sword of Damocles hanging over its head.

For the life of me, I can't understand why the Democratic Party establishment got behind this train wreck. The Repubs & Jeb Bush, yes. There's really nothing wrong with Jeb other than that the country is sick of Bushes. But, Hillary, why, why, WHY?; 10/17/15, 12:44 PM
Beldar said...: I agree with the premise of the linked article: Biden IS running. If he's making a decision based on the results of the first debate, it's a decision about how that affects his campaign, and what adjustments he should make to his campaign plans -- not whether to campaign.

But what interests me intensely -- although this article devotes only a single sentence to it, in a reference to Valerie Jarrett and bitterness from 2008 -- is whatever role Obama is playing behind the scenes in Biden's thinking and plans. With a whisper in the ear of his attorney general, Obama can, I believe, effectively determine whether Clinton is or isn't indicted for national security violations which dwarf, by orders of magnitude, those which led to Gen. Petraeus' guilty plea.; 10/17/15, 1:17 PM
Big Mike said...: Back in the day liberal pundits routinely asserted that the Republican Party was trying to fly on one wing. Today's Democrats are trying to fly on the extreme edge of the left wing. How they expect to stay up is beyond me.; 10/17/15, 2:00 PM
Brando said...: They also are doing nothing to test Hillary. Do they really think in the general election the GOP candidate is going to say "hey, let's not talk about Hillary's scandals" or leave out her flip flopping? Coronations produce untested candidates.; 10/17/15, 3:15 PM
ddh said...: "If something serious were to happen to Clinton — self-inflicted or not — the party would be entering a presidential race on favorable terrain but with a substantial talent problem."

The Democratic nominee might win, but the speaker is in Pauline Kael's bubble. Obama and Clinton are popular with Democrats, but hardly anyone else.; 10/17/15, 9:07 PM