IDEA OF THE WEEK: GOVERNOR HILLARY.
At Newsweek, Jonathan Alter writes that he has the (off the record) reporting to support an idea I've been mulling over since the day of David Paterson's swearing in: that Hillary Clinton could be the next governor of New York State. Paterson, who admitted on his first day as Governor to an extramarital affair with a state employee, has since been hit by a barrage of evidence that infidelity and favor-trading were, er, habitual parts of his professional and personal life. A new day in Albany hasn't exactly dawned. And if Paterson makes it through Elliot Spitzer's term to 2010, he may be too beaten and bruised to run for reelection.
Enter Hillary. Looking forward to a gubernatorial run could ease her wrenching departure from the Democratic primary, Alter writes. His sources tell him that while Hillary has considered the idea, Bill Clinton categorically rejects it. But let's look beyond the political question of whether serving as Governor could position Hillary for a potential second White House run. (I believe such a run is highly unlikely.) Rather, what appeals to me about the idea is that being a governor would truly play to Hillary's strengths as a wonk on issues such as health care, family medical leave, and children's welfare. These are all policy areas in which states can make real strides, creating programs that push the national debate in a more progressive direction.
--Dana Goldstein
Feeds: 


COMMENTS (24)
I think a second run by Hillary is a virtual certainty if she thinks she has a chance of winning.
Posted by: Alan | April 2, 2008 9:19 AM
If Hillary really is the great wonk and master of legislative maneuvering she claims to be, then wouldn't she serve the party and the country best staying in the Senate and seeing to it that President Obama's agenda is passed? Since she isn't, I agree it would be a good idea for her to disappear form the national stage and run New York state. There's no reason she can't run in 2016 or 2012 in the highly unlikely event Obama loses. There's not a strong bench in the Democratic party beyond Obama, so her age shouldn't be an issue.
Posted by: Ron | April 2, 2008 9:22 AM
If the rumor that Hillary is considering the gubernatorial run in '10 but Bill is saying no is true, how depressing is that? Fuck what Bill wants, HRC should be able to make that choice.
Posted by: Persia | April 2, 2008 9:29 AM
"Fuck what Bill wants, HRC should be able to make that choice."
I think Bill still thinks he can pry her into the White House. And there's more money for Citibank in nation-wide debt bondage to the health insurance companies. So, I'm it's her *backers and funders* who said no.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 9:39 AM
"Fuck what Bill wants, HRC should be able to make that choice."
I think Bill still thinks he can pry her into the White House. And there's more money for Citibank in nation-wide debt bondage to the health insurance companies. So, I'm sure it's her *backers and funders* who said no. NY State is small potatoes.
Hillary is pimped out all the way, kids. Her leash don't stop with Bill.
In fact, I'll stick with that and even cut Bill some slack for once. Could it be that her campaign's race baiting comes straight from our masters of the universe? Have they not sucessfully distracted the public from their own mendacity by pitting one part of the canaille against another since the dawn of the Republic?
It's just too bad "the Clintons" never remove their leash.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 9:46 AM
"the Clintons."
LOL
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 9:56 AM
Hmmmm. "Pimped out," "leash," "masters of the universe," and "canaille." Interesting paranoid fantasy life you've got there. Re the governor idea, it's just the MSM trying desperately to get their designated hate object out of the way, one more desperate cry of "why won't that bitch quit?" Pathetic.
Posted by: scottreads | April 2, 2008 10:04 AM
Since her chances at the nomination are diminishing, perhaps this would be a good career move. As Governor of a powerful state she could have far more power to enact her own policies.
Posted by: Lesley | April 2, 2008 10:22 AM
Well, there's precedent -- New York has had other Republican governors recently.
Posted by: cervantes | April 2, 2008 10:25 AM
No. As a New Yorker, I say let another state being the political justification of Hillary as a politician.
Posted by: Ken of New York | April 2, 2008 10:33 AM
I don't see the appeal of the governor's job for Hillary compared to the Senate. Of course, I don't really see why she'd want the presidency, either, since it doesn't suit her temprament: by all accounts, she's a better work horse than show horse (despite the bile expressed by some above). The governorship is a somewhat time-limited job -- even someone as popular as Mario Cuomo couldn't get a 4th four-year term -- but the Senate is forever if you want it.
Posted by: demtom | April 2, 2008 10:38 AM
I don't see the appeal of the governor's job for Hillary compared to the Senate. Of course, I don't really see why she'd want the presidency, either, since it doesn't suit her temprament: by all accounts, she's a better work horse than show horse (despite the bile expressed by some above). The governorship is a somewhat time-limited job -- even someone as popular as Mario Cuomo couldn't get a 4th four-year term -- but the Senate is forever if you want it.
Posted by: demtom | April 2, 2008 10:40 AM
I don't think Hillary's strengths are in the rough and tumble of negotiating advantage with her political opponents (the NY legislature is controlled by Republicans and old-style machine dems). I hope that's not too understated. Hillary is too convinced of her rightness to be any good at negotiating compromise. That's a strength and a weakness. She is much more suited to the judiciary or some other position where public compromise is not required for success.
Posted by: Barbara | April 2, 2008 10:42 AM
I don't think Hillary's strengths are in the rough and tumble of negotiating advantage with her political opponents (the NY legislature is controlled by Republicans and old-style machine dems). I hope that's not too understated. Hillary is too convinced of her rightness to be any good at negotiating compromise. That's a strength and a weakness. She is much more suited to the judiciary or some other position where public compromise is not required for success.
Posted by: Barbara | April 2, 2008 10:45 AM
"Re the governor idea, it's just the MSM trying desperately to get their designated hate object out of the way, one more desperate cry of "why won't that bitch quit?" Pathetic."
That she's their "designated hate object" may address why the MSM is pushing the idea. It doesn't address why Bill said said no.
He must think they have some pull somewhere, and all he needs out of PA is some sort of "popular" rationale, even if it's "the racist white people (we're going to put into debt bondage with the insurance companies-- because garbage like that deserves it!)."
Where do we think that pull is?
By the way, it's not so hard to come up with conspiracy theories these days, given *reality.* I think people in MA putting their government mandated (but no cheaper) high deductible health insurance on their credit cards (at usury rates of 20% interest) is a reality, conspiratorial or not.
So, why settle for NY?
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 10:56 AM
She won't do this. You only get two terms as Governor.
As a Senator, you can go on forever.
Posted by: John Petty | April 2, 2008 11:03 AM
ron, I think you're underestimating the degree to which Hillary's 'never say die' campaign will get the blame if Obama loses in November.
In either case, the party won't likely nominate a woman if a black man fails to win the Presidency. They will be too gun shy.
Posted by: soullite | April 2, 2008 11:19 AM
The fantasies of the Obama folks ... Dana, Alter, and poster Barbara above ... are endlessly fascinating.
Alter and Dana just cannot understand why half the country is still voting for her. Barbara, on the other hand, like so many Obamabots, doesn't actually understand HRC's senate record or the American judiciary for that matter.
Clinton actually has a prety good track record on bipartisanship in the Senate ... better than Obama's. As for judges not having to compromise ... get real. Judges do that everyday from common pleas court to the US Supreme Court.
I guess the Hillary as Governor meme is replacing the Hillary for Majority Leader fantasy that the Obama folks continue to dream about. 'Cause its not like Senate Dems have any say in who their own leader would be ... or the people of NY are asking for Paterson's resignation.
Posted by: Dallas Dem | April 2, 2008 11:47 AM
what appeals to me about the idea is that being a governor would truly play to Hillary's strengths as a wonk on issues such as health care, family medical leave, and children's welfare.
I remember the days when people thought being a Senator was a pretty big deal. Now you'd think she was stuck on the Smallville city council.
P.S. Dallas Dem - If you think Dana is an Obamabot you haven't been reading this site for very long.
Posted by: Jinchi | April 2, 2008 12:30 PM
I'm with Ken of New York. People keep foisting the Clintons on us, first in the Senate and now as Governor. How about we give Arkansas another try, huh? Or President Obama could find them a nice ambassadorial post in Ulan Bator, or whatever they're calling it nowadays.
Posted by: Henderstock | April 2, 2008 1:33 PM
DallasDem, I think the Senate is actually a place where HRC shines because she can negotiate within its confines without having to lose face in public. Maybe you think I am an Obamabot living in a fantasy world, but I was living and breathing health care policy in 1994 and Hillary Clinton did not have the goods to wrestle it to the ground and I see no evidence that her basic strategic methods have changed in such a way that she would be more successful at it in the future. I also hate the triangulation game that she and her husband play. I tolerated it in the 90s, but I wouldn't say I ever liked it.
But you are free to think that she walks on water.
Posted by: Barbara | April 2, 2008 1:41 PM
I hope you are not an Obama fan, Barbara, because he heaps praise on WJC and the "third way" in the first chapter of "The Audacity of Hope".
Posted by: J Bean | April 2, 2008 5:43 PM
"I also hate the triangulation game that she and her husband play. I tolerated it in the 90s, but I wouldn't say I ever liked it."
Obama is the best triangulator that I have seen appear on the national scene since the advent of Bill Clinton. So this statement is pretty darn humorous to me!
"But you are free to think that she walks on water."
I don't think she walks on water. She has a lot of flaws. So, too, does Obama and pretty much any human being living or dead. I do think it is ridiculous, however, that many seemingly intelligent progressives lose their minds ... or ability to recall actual facts when the topic is Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: Dallas Dem | April 2, 2008 6:51 PM
Jinchi wrote:
"P.S. Dallas Dem - If you think Dana is an Obamabot you haven't been reading this site for very long."
Sorry, not true. I have been reading this site for years.
Dana ... like many others ... has been far too willing to repeat whatever the latest "bad thing" Hillary or her husband has done.
Like buying into the meme that HRC implied Obama was a Muslim on "60 Minutes".
Most of the people repeating this fiction either didn't see the interview or are already predisposed to believe that Clinton is Satan incarnate. Steve Kroft badgered Clinton and repeatedly asked the same question before he got the response the "as far as I know" response. This kind of thing is why so many Americans have little respect for journalism!
Posted by: Dallas Dem | April 2, 2008 7:11 PM