Hillary's Dilemma

The BKP

Grand Inquistor
Jul 15, 2008
120
37
16
Energizing her party with the passionate support of millions, a strong, independent American woman stands on the threshold of history. An inspiration to her gender, she has come to embody the dream of women being professionally successful and personally fulfilled.

Balancing both a historic political career and the demands of motherhood and matrimony, she is living the dreams of those who came before her and setting the standard for those to follow. The first woman on her party’s presidential ticket, the American people will decide on November 4th what the next entry will be beneath her name in our country’s history.

By the way, did I mention her name is Sarah Palin?

The prospect of this surely vexes Senator Hillary Clinton just as much as it delights Palin and her supporters. That being said, the question facing Senator Clinton in the wake of Palin’s meteoric rise is – How does Palin impact the future prospects of her still unfulfilled presidential aspirations? The answers lie at the heart of Hillary’s dilemma.

Being a lifelong feminist, one of the driving forces that propelled Senator Clinton’s presidential dreams was the hope of being the nation’s first female president. Having been thwarted by Barack Obama’s equally historic pursuit of the Democratic presidential nomination this year, Clinton’s dreams, while not destroyed, were at the very least delayed.

Should Obama win the presidency and serve two terms, currently 60 years-old, Hillary’s window of opportunity would still be open in 2016. While opinions differ on whether or not a run for the White House at age 68 would be viable for her, there’s little doubt that the additional experience added to her resume between now and then - including a potential stint as Governor of New York – would only enhance her chances should she mount another campaign for the Oval Office.

On a potentially darker political note, should Obama find himself taking on the visage of a modern Jimmy Carter, Clinton could become the rallying point of an anti-Obama insurgency within the Democratic Party in 2012. Were economic calamity and political tumult torment Obama as it did Carter, could Hillary resist the cries of her supporters and Democratic pundits to mount a challenge to the politically mortally wounded incumbent much like Ted Kennedy did in 1980?

While it would surely lead to a bloody and potentially devastating civil war within the Democratic Party, it might likewise provide Clinton with her quickest route to the White House and the realization of her dream of being the first female president.

With John McCain’s selection of Palin as his running mate, though, those dreams became starkly dimmer and much more complicated.

Should McCain defeat Obama, Palin would then become the nation’s first female vice president. Having secured her place in history, Palin could then mount her own run for the presidency and the historic distinction so fervently sought by Clinton. From the position of vice president, Palin would naturally enjoy substantial advantages in her quest to move from the Naval Observatory to the White House.

For both Palin and Clinton, the primary factor influencing their respective shots at the coveted title of first female American president is McCain himself.

Should McCain serve one term and be denied a second at the ballot box, how would that impact Palin’s future prospects for the Republican presidential nomination? On the other hand, were McCain to defy the political odds and maintain Republican control of the White House for an uninterrupted sixteen years by serving two terms, would Palin’s presidential prospects be dashed by an electorate burnt out on pachyderm presidencies? Were that series of events to fall into place, the odds of Hillary donning the historic mantle would be dramatically improved.

Then again, a McCain presidency also holds a potential combination nightmare-dream opportunity for Clinton and Palin; his health.

At 72, McCain would be the oldest person to take the Oath of Office for a first term. Having had skin cancer removed previously, McCain’s health in conjunction with his age gives many pause. It also would give Palin the distinction of being America’s first female president should McCain become incapacitated or die in office. While this would close the door on Hillary’s historic hopes, it might well set the stage for a titanic all-women battle royal between herself and an incumbent President Palin.

Following the logic that a seasoned Hillary could easily dispatch Palin even while enjoying the advantages of incumbency, there is growing talk among Clinton’s supporters that perhaps they should lend Fate and Hillary a hand by voting for the Republican ticket this coming November. Though failing to grasp the title of first female American president, her dream of rising to the presidency would nonetheless be fulfilled; albeit in an admittedly less grandiose and historic fashion.

Thus the crux of Hillary’s dilemma – Whose victory on November 4th would best serve her own future presidential aspirations?

That being the case, one wonders who the junior Senator from New York will actually vote for once she enters the ballot booth come the first Tuesday of November. Ah, to be the proverbial fly on the wall......

Decisions, decisions, faithful readers. Stay tuned for further updates as events warrant and the pieces fall into place.
 
Balancing both a historic political career and the demands of motherhood and matrimony, she is living the dreams of those who came before her and setting the standard for those to follow.
i don't believe that it's healthy for her children if she becomes vice-president before they are all 18 years old.
 
young children need both parents fully present in their lives to mature healthily.

So anyone with children under 18 should be precluded from seeking public office then? Or is it just the presidency?

What about families where one of the parents travel extensively for their careers?

Should we also exclude parents with children under 18 from military service? Perhaps fire and police positions as well?

While I am wholeheartedly in support of two parent families, this notion is simplistic and naive at best.
 
So anyone with children under 18 should be precluded from seeking public office then? Or is it just the presidency?

What about families where one of the parents travel extensively for their careers?

Should we also exclude parents with children under 18 from military service? Perhaps fire and police positions as well?

While I am wholeheartedly in support of two parent families, this notion is simplistic and naive at best.
i'm just saying that the children will grow up psychologically difficient. happens all the time.
 
A psychologist is not a medical expert.

Families have historically been separated for long periods of time. Sure, if everyone could stay home with their kids 24-7, never have to work, devote every waking moment to their children until they're 21 that would be great. But the truth of the matter is, humans have always sent their children away, or been separated from their children for long periods of time for various reasons. Royal children were sent to live with royalty in far-away lands in the dark and middle ages, to keep them safe, to create bonds with other kingdoms. Children were sent to apprentice with complete strangers while still very young. Fathers went campaigning and to war, mothers were widowed and married strangers and moved away.

Today children often spend time between a variety of people...grandparents, separated parents, aunts, uncles, siblings. People send their children off to boarding school, fathers work for months on the sea or on oil rigs, they travel far away to work as executives, salesmen, pilots.

With one parent in the home and one parent working as VP, I just see this as a non-issue. One nice thing about large families is no matter who happens to be busy or out of the home at any time, there are always others to step up and maintain the family unity. The older boy is going away to iraq, but sis will be home. Mom might be working and traveling some, but dad will now be at home, instead of on the oil fields or fishing.

and nothing is more annoying than people who afford god-like status to PSYCHOLOGISTS (who aren't doctors) or even DOCTORS. They're just people, for pete's sakes. They all have different opinions about different topics, and not one of them is infallible.
 

Forum List

Back
Top