Friday, January 27, 2006

Elephants, Mules, and Hillary

“Nothing is so admirable in politics as a short memory.” ~ John Kenneth Galbraith

There has been a lot of blogs and radio talk show hosts talking about the latest Gallup poll that shows that if the 2008 Presidential election were held today, Hillary Rodham would lose.

Not so fast.

The poll shows only 16% of Americans would definitely vote for Hillary as President.

But 32% would consider it. You can’t ignore that 32%. Put that together with the 16% and the 1% that don’t know, and you get 49%. And now you have a much closer election. Rich Glasgow, over at his place, points out that Hillary carries quite a bit of baggage with her into the elections. Rich says, and I quote:

“Apparently, she thinks she's put enough distance between herself and her own ethics clouds that few will recall how she fell under them on a routine basis when she shared (and abused) power with the president”

I, along with many other Conservatives, agree. She definitely is counting on the short memories of the American people, and the American people do have short memories. Especially the Democrats. And it is the Democrats who will be deciding who will head their next Presidential ticket.

It occurs to me that the symbols of the two political parties are eerily appropriate now.

The Democrats have the Mule, (some would say Jackass) and the Republicans have the Elephant.
Mules are pretty much universally considered stubborn and stupid. Now I’m not calling Democrats stupid, but some people might say poor memory can be an attribute of stupidity. And as I said, a poor memory would be an asset in the consideration of Hillary in the run for President.


And stubborn? No doubt. If the Democrats go ahead and run Hillary in spite of the results of this Gallup poll, they definitely are stubborn. And again, some would say stupid.

A popular song from the fifties:

“A mule is an animal with long funny ears
he kicks up at anything he hears
His back is brawny but his brain is weak
he's just plain stupid with a stubborn streak”


On the other hand, Elephants are considered faithful and have long memories. There is an old saying that elephants never forget. And, Dr. Seuss, in his classic children’s book, “Horton Hears a Who“, says:

“I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, an elephant’s faithful, one hundred percent.”

So, the Democrats probably will nominate Hillary as their 2008 Presidential nominee, if she decides to run, and the Republicans will be only too happy to remind America of her questionable past.

The game is afoot!

29 comments:

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

I don't know, Mark. I'm always suspicious of these gallup polls.

Listening to Dick Morris talking about a Hillary nomination has me worried. She may carry a lot of baggage, but I think a significant part of the population romanticize the possibility of having the first woman as President; a lot of liberals I know just love Clinton and have a very sentimental, romanticized remembrance of his legacy. Their love of Bill may wash over onto her. Of course, that's really not news....just stating.

I just wouldn't dismiss Hillary so readily. I'd be cautious. Republicans will need someone who isn't just well-qualified, but someone who is charismatically electable. We may end up having to go with a Giulianni or *gasp*...even a Senator McCain (as unlikely as that may seem). These are two guys who may be familiar with your average Joe who doesn't follow politics. Politicians who make their rounds in the media circles, on the late night shows, and enjoy a certain celebritihood, who appeal to the moderates, have to be looked at as potential candidates. Not because they are the best candidate...but because they might have what it takes to win an election.

Sheila said...

As someone left of center, I'm going to make a prediction.

The country whether red, blue, or purple is not ready for a woman president in a time of war. NOT because she's a woman. Because there's only a Freshman Senator running. That's not enough experience in my books.

So allow me to predict for you. Sheila's wild prediction. And I'm surprised the conservative radar is not up yet.

Al Gore will run again. Not picking a fight. However, guys look at this. He almost won the 2000 election. There's a LOT of people who would vote for him again. I read his MLK speech that didn't get any MSM attention. It was awesome.

YOu guys can say he's stiff on TV all you want...After President Bush's down home boyism, no one cares. The country is capable of seeing past the TV persona to the brain and capability for tactical decision making.

I predict if Al Gore runs and wins the primary, it will be a Gore CLinton ticket....LOL Clinton/Gore....Gore/Clinton? Pretty good.

I also predict...all you none believers that McCain is your best chance for the Republican ticket and your going to bend to the will of the general population.

Erudite Redneck said...

Mark, dude, if you don't know the difference between a mule and a donkey, then you don't know much about rhe Democratic Party, its symbol OR its inclinations.

Try Research(tm). "Makes Writing Better!"

:-)

Mark said...

ER, I know the difference between a mule and a donkey, but if I had called it a donkey, I wouldn't have been able to use the quote from "When You wish upon a star".

I actualIy typed donkey first, then changed it so I could use the Disney refernce. claim poetic license.

Sheila, I don't think Gore will be on the ticket, but I do agree that McCain has a good chance of winning the nomination, and I think he would possibly be a good president. Right now, he only does what he thinks he needs to do to satisfy all the people all the time, but if he was president, I think he'd be more Conservative than he shows himself to be currently.

I also think, in times of war, any Democrat would be more conservative.

Mark said...

" just wouldn't dismiss Hillary so readily. I'd be cautious."

Smithy, That's exactly my point. I am not dismissing her at all, but I think others may be, and that could end up hurting the Republican party.

Mark said...

By the way, ER, did you happen to notice, in the picture of Hillary, that she appears to have an adam's apple?

That may explain some things.

Fritz said...

Sheila,
The country would be happy to have a woman President, Condi 08! If you are so concerned about Abramoff, say cattle futures.

Gayle said...

I'd vote for Condi for sure!

Mark, I found your post interesting. I don't dismiss Hillary, I simply don't want her for President of the United States. The very thought sends shivers down my spine! I liked your analysis of the Mule and the Elephant, but then why wouldn't I, being a conservative?

I don't really want McCain either; he straddles the fence way too much and I'm unsure whether, if President, he would be more conservative. I want someone (anyone) who tells the truth all of the time and doesn't worry about kissing up to the American people. Of course then he/she wouldn't be ellected, so it's a pretty good bet that's not going to happen!

BRUISER said...

For God's Sake Mark you are one to sit in judgement over questionable pasts? May I remind you the party you elected is full of chicken hawk never served a day in the military veteran smearing scum of the earth?

Besides being a very biased article you left out that in the same poll 12% of Americans and only 12% would "definately" vote for Condi Rice...that is if the Diebold, ES&S, & Sequoia Republican owned voting machines cast the votes correctly. Why were there votes that flipped to Bush in counties again in 2004 and none the other way? We'll we were fooled again.

As those in power continue to harass the hardworking Americans in this country and suspend their civil liberties why are you on the right not asking why there is no transparency in the Bush Administration? Why not investigate the mining deaths? Wehy not investigate Katrina? Why not investigate 9/11? Why not investigate the smearing of American's veterans and Active Duty Soldiers?

Why not release the Bush/ Abramoff photo's?

Why not release the slave labor of the US territory of the Northern Mariana Islands & Sai Pan?

PS- Dick Morris is a hasbeen who plays both sides of the fence for small profit from his few book sales...I am sure Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch give him his monthly stipend to pay the bills.

Mark said...

Bruiser, you're rant is so off target it's irrelevant. Or irrelephant. So I'm not going to respond to it except to say where exactly did you get the idea that it is biased? Dud you even read it?

Also, in answer to your question, "May I remind you the party you elected is full of chicken hawk never served a day in the military veteran smearing scum of the earth?"

Yes, you may remind me. As soon as you provide proof that Republicans ever smeared veterans. I've asked you to explain that statement before and so far, you haven't. But I guess it is hard to come up with proof that doesn't exist.

jgf said...

I agree with Wordsmith--I don't trust polls. It is too easy to effect the outcome. We cannot dismiss Hilly. The thought of her in the oval office makes me cry for our nation.

Sheila: No Clinton will take second fiddle to Gore. Pride wouldn't let them.

KEvron said...

"Rich Glasgow, over at his place, points out that Hillary carries quite a bit of baggage with her into the elections. Rich says, and I quote...."

actually, you're quoting rich quoting an unattributed op/ed piece from investors.com. in this piece, our unnamed author says:

"she thinks she's put enough distance between herself and her own ethics clouds".

and what is this mounting baggage with which sen.clinton is burdened? travelgate! as if that long-dead horse hadn't been whipped enough already. to give you an example of the ridiculous nature of the rhetoric therein, i've selected this passage:

"It took a pro-Clinton D.C. jury only a short while to find Dale innocent of all the charges the White House had trumped up against him."

see something wrong with unnamed's logic? he describes the jury as "pro-clinton" (and how can he know this?), yet admits that they found billy dale innocent of all charges. so it's a pro-clinton jury that failed to find in favor of the "clintons' trumped-up charges". so what does any of this prove? and why attempt to discredit the jury for their unproven bias if that bias failed to sway them anyway?

unnamed also mentions, in no great detail, that sen. has some splainin' to do re: her missing records during the whitewater debacle, yet another dead end in the pursuit of the clitons.

well, good luck in seeding that "ominous cloud" that hangs over sen. clinton, guys. travelgate and whitewater are sure to have the same devastating effect on her as they did on pres. clinton. or maybe the mudslingers are counting on the distance of time to help cloud the issue of clouds....

do you know why he was called "slick willy"? because none of the lies flung at him ever stuck. but maybe ken starr has a few more closeted skeletons up his sleeve. talk about pork!

KEvron

ps

please tell me you guys aren't going to drag out that old "vince foster was murdered!" number. that dog just won't hunt, either.

Erudite Redneck said...

No need to just WEAR your party's sexism on yer sleeve, Mark. We know it's there.

And shame on the wimmins here who didn't jump ugly on you for it.

Old Soldier said...

"May I remind you the party you elected is full of chicken hawk never served a day in the military veteran smearing scum of the earth?"

I'd like an explanation on that comment as well.

jgf said...

"And shame on the wimmins here who didn't jump ugly on you for it."

Don't refer to me as "wimmins." That is completely unacceptable and sexist. As for his "party's sexism." That is just ridiculous. The Republican party has done far more for helping women than any democrat to date.

Erudite Redneck said...

jgf, LOL!

KEvron said...

"The Republican party has done far more for helping women than any democrat to date."

old republican would like an explanation on that comment, as well.

KEvron

Poison Pero said...

Mark, that Adam's Apple, is brutal....I've always figured, though.

http://members.cox.net/jayc1832/Lib%20Rips/Hillary/Caught%20in%20the%20Mens%20Room.jpg

Mary said...

Polls, schmolls. They are as untrustworthy as Bill Clinton.

Personally, I would vote ABH --anybody BUT Hillary.

It has nothing to do with her being a woman. I just think she'd be a disaster as president.

I'm not losing any sleep over that. She's so polarizing that I don't think she stands a chance.

Mark said...

Mary, I ran across several blogs talking about this poll, plus Rush Limbaugh mentioned it. I don't put mich fauth in polls also, but my point is, that Hillary is the front runner for the Democrats in spite of the polls. I say let her run. Nothing would help the Republicans stay in power better.

Marie's Two Cents said...

I'm with Old Soldier on this, correct me if I am wrong but wasnt Bush 41 shot down during WW2? How about John McCain? Wasnt he a POW in Viet Nam? How about Bob Dole? I would have to do some research on all the Present day senators and representatives but I betcha alot of them served also. And just because you didnt see combat doesnt mean you never served. Bush 43 was in The Air National Guard in Texas, and Alabama or Georgia I think. Granted he didnt see combat, but he sure served!

The WordSmith from Nantucket said...

Don't forget: Donald Rumsfeld served as a Navy aviator. And Bill Clinton...he, um...nevermind.

Erudite Redneck said...

I don't believe I'd be bragging on Dubya's "service" in the Guard, which was meant to, and did, keep him out of Vietnam.

I also don't believe I'd milk Clinton's opposition to the Vietnam War much more. For every right-right who thinks less of him, there is a lib who amens it -- and in light of present similarities in Iraq, and similar "world police" attitudes of the U.S. governent, more nonlib people are seeing that opposition to stupid unnecessary wars is admirable, not a negative.

Mark said...

Piffle. The only similaritues between this war and Viet Nam is the looney libs doing their best to undermine the war effort and make America lose.

Unecessary? Why don't we ask some of those 27 million freed Iraqus, if they think it's unecessary?

"I would like to salute you and salute all the troops who are freeing 27 million people. Please stop questioning the administration and their decision. It was the best decision anybody could take, freeing 27 million people! Thank you, Mr. President!"

-- American Iraqi Kurdish woman, during President Bush's appearance in Kansas.

Mark said...

I think this is a good time to point out here, that the only people in this comment thread that is smearing the veterans are the Liberals, re:

"I don't believe I'd be bragging on Dubya's "service" in the Guard, which was meant to, and did, keep him out of Vietnam." --ER

Serving in the National Guard is serving, too. The National Guard does their part in America's war efforts as well. They are just as important as the grunt on the front lines.

KEvron said...

people who saw their service to our country smeared by republicans:

john mccain
max cleland
john kerry
john murtha

KEvron

KEvron said...

does going awol from the guard count as service?

KEvron

Anonymous said...

Well, it counts a for more than draft dodging does, Kev...

KEvron said...

"Well, it counts a for more than draft dodging does, Kev..."

let's leave dick "five and alive" cheney outta this....