Pages

Monday, February 8, 2016

Hillary Clinton's Audacious Pragamtism

Ezra Klein argued recently that she is the truly audacious one in running as a pragmatic realist and it's a very good point.

"What Clinton is relearning in the snows of Iowa and New Hampshire is that there's nothing audacious about hope. Hope is the one commodity every voter wants to buy. It's pragmatism that you can't sell."

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/28/10858464/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-political-realism

You know one of the knocks on Hillary is that she is a phony who will say anything to get elected. But one you look at it, she hasn't tried to run as Bernie Sanders.

She has made the realism case. You can argue that she is truer to herself than say Barrack Obama was in 2008.

Just so we're clear, I love me some President Obama so don't misunderstand. But he ran on the vague slogan of 'hope and change.'

For this reason there are those like Bill Press who feel POTUS has let them down. Yes, Bernie notably endorsed the book.

http://www.amazon.com/Buyers-Remorse-Obama-Progressives-Down/dp/1476792615/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1454951866&sr=8-1&keywords=bill+press
When you browse Press' book you can't' help but conclude that he and many liberals heard what they wanted to hear from Obama-which was by design no doubt. He didn't run on a political revolution but a post partisan world. 

Press says Obama misunderstood his mandate, but it's Press that misunderstood in the first place. Obama had run on post partisanship right back to his first great speech at the 2004 Dem convention. 

Again, what is audacious is to run on pragmatic realism. Think about it. George W. Bush ran against Washington-particularly against Bill Clinton's zipper problems. 

Obama ran against Washington and for post partisanship. Ted Cruz is running on blowing up Washington-and he's done a great job of that already when you consider that he alone largely caused the 2013 government shutdown. 

The GOP always runs against Washington-even those who have been part of it for years. 

Hillary is unusual in not running against it as I argued last night. 

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/02/if-politics-is-vocation-we-need-insider.html

There are those who warn she can't win with such a message. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-franquirivera-phd/abandon-all-hope-hillarys_b_9142170.html

I disagree. From what I've seen, many African-Americans who were for Obama in 2008, many Dems in general are ready for a change doer rather than change talker. 

But like in my previous piece I will argue that maybe the most radical position of all is not run as a pragmatist. As an insider who knows the rules of the game and how to navigate them effectively in order to accomplish the things Dems want accomplished. 

As Obama later admitted, even in wanting to change the rules of the game you have to know the previous ones and be able to play by them starting out. 

As for those who say she isn't garnering excitement, they aren't paying attention to the right places. 

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/02/pastor-kenneth-stewart-after-hillarys.html


3 comments:

  1. Yeah for the pragmatic realists! In a sea of Jacobin radicals.

    ReplyDelete
  2. LOL.

    Dare to be a pragmatic realist!

    ReplyDelete