Richard Cohen articulates the argument that there’s a moral obligation for Hillary Clinton to run for president:
It’s not possible that Clinton is actually mulling over whether to run. Not only does she have a moral obligation to do so — she’s repressing other potential candidacies and vacuuming up their funds — but the sooner she drops the standard political pose and exudes genuine feelings, the better a candidate she will be. She is not the Democratic Party’s best hope. She is its only hope.
as well as the argument against her running:
I have grave doubts about Hillary Clinton’s viability. She still has no resounding message, and in an anti-Washington era she is the very personification of the loathed capital city. Her credentials, her experience, her marriage to Bill and her association with President Obama will be used against her. By many measures, she may be the best candidate, but this is a country that punished George W. Bush for an unnecessary war by inexplicably electing him to a second term. He was, as they say, likable.
Not to mention that for a party whose winning coalition consists of Hispanics, blacks, the young, and single women, Hillary Clinton seems an unlikely standard bearer.
We are living in an ironic age. She’ll probably run as an outsider.
She is not the Democratic Party’s best hope. She is its only hope.
That’ll probably be the dumbest thing I read today. At least it isn’t shocking, like the immigration article from TNR or the storyof the Medill Innocence Project framing someone for murder, but it is dumb.
Help me, Obiwan Kenobi!
Lolz, isn’t the new one supposed to be out by then? I’m sure some idiots will try and spin it as the narrative for some candidate or another!