STARS OF 2016

Mitt Romney says "No no no no no no" if you ask if he's running for president.  But, watching him, I'd bet he's running.

So far his opponent for the not-insane Repub vote is Jeb Bush.  But Jeb will probably take firm stands that reveal him as being in what today's unbelievably sick climate passes for a "moderate" conservative.  Mitt, on the other hand, will pander to the extremists, then segue into someone seemingly reasonable, then revert, and so on - back and forth in a nimble dance.  We saw it when he was caught telling a room full of rich monsters that 47% of us aren't pulling our weight and should be set adrift, then blithely informed the world that that was "completely wrong".  His shamelessness and his ability to get away with it are his qualifications for the nomination.  Can he get it again?  Possibly, but I wouldn't put down any money yet.

On the Democratic side we now have Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri saying that he may run if Hillary doesn't.  He's a successful governor, formerly a longtime state attorney general, and a tough guy.  No particular charisma, but he seems solid.  He may believably believe that he couldn't compete with Hillary because both are centrists.

Gov. Martin O'Malley of Maryland is another matter.  He also more-or-less says he'll pass it up if Hillary goes for it; but don't believe it.  He's running now.  He has to be hoping she'll stand aside, in which case he won't have alienated the Clintons.  But he'll run whether she does or not.  Where he'll stand on the ideological spectrum, and how sincerely, remain to be seen.

Brian Schweitzer will be a commentator for MSNBC, which will help him become known nationally.  He says the Dems aren't always right and the Repubs aren't always wrong.  It's a good line, tends to open people's minds.  But, apart from his positions for guns and for "clean" coal, he's very progressive.  He also remains highly popular in his own state.  And in important respects he's the Anti-Hillary: an outsider, a fighter, and a charmer.  It's being insinuated that he doesn't have to be taken seriously.  And he may end up not going for it.  But he can't be counted out.

In a previous posting I said something truly dumb, and I apologize for it.  What I said was that Joe Biden can't dissociate himself from the administration's record.  Of course he can - and he is.  A recent article about him mentions that he told a friend that he's more a populist than the president is.  I've no doubt that was leaked.  He doesn't really have to worry about anything besides where Hillary stands.  And he can run to her left because, hey, conditions change and you have to look ahead.  Will he try for it?  Well, what does he have to lose?

My Spidey sense tells me that the Hillary-is-inevitable consensus is being orchestrated by Clinton and Obama loyalists, some of them journalists, who are the Dem establishment of today and who want to retain their connections, their influence, and their sweetheart deals even if it means that we get another lame president.  And I think their secret fear is that someone they have no ties to is going to show up, make them an issue, and take it away from her.

Why shouldn't it be Hillary?  Try these reasons:

~She's a neoliberal and an unabashed ally of Wall Street, when the Dem electorate is the reverse of that.

~She's a neocon in foreign policy, voted for the Iraq And Afghan wars, and even favored Mr. Obama's abortive plan to attack Syria.

~She's elderly, when the Dem nomination will be decided by the young and restless.

~She has no personality.  None.

~She's a weak campaigner.

~She's old news with plenty of baggage.

~Her own words make her out to be masculine in outlook, power-hungry, and vindictive.

Are those reasons enough to look elsewhere?  What more would you want?  Well, try this.

I've said before, and I think it's a major point, that her indifference to her husband's infidelities will hurt her. An American president isn't just a chief executive but the head of the family, as it were; we want to be able to look up to him or her.  There aren't many wives out there who would shrug if they caught their hubbies shagging other women.  They'd want to be able to identify with Hillary, not only in public life but in her private attitudes.  They don't accept an open marriage as anything but depravity. Added to that, we have the tabloids now attributing to her numerous affairs with persons of both genders.  If she wants her reputation to remain intact, the way to make that happen is to bow out of the race soon.

The poll that showed her with 73% of the Dem primary vote means less than nothing this far out, when she has no challenger to serve as contrast with her and to controvert her empty wonderfulness.

I well recall that I said confidently that President Obama would be challenged for the '12 nomination.  And he should have been, not least so since he's now nominating conservatives to be Federal judges.  But Hillary isn't an incumbent, no matter how resolved some are to portray her as one.

The idea that no one of substance would get in against her is ludicrous.  It goes against everything we've seen in American politics.  For a number of prospective candidates it'll be now or never.  They owe her nothing. And they want it "so bad they can taste it".

Angry young guys out of the military and self-confident billionaires are two groups that could produce a candidate for Dems who've had enough.  The pain and frustration of the Obama years are probably sufficient to precipitate the nomination of a fresh face.  That candidate's biggest attractors will be progressivism and an eagerness to slug it out with the reactionaries.

Keep watching the margins.