It is becoming clear, as a result of recent events involving Russia and Ukraine, that the foreign policy issue will matter more in the Presidential Election of 2016 than domestic policy, including ObamaCare.
This is NOT what many progressives and liberals would prefer, as there are many domestic problems that need attention on the agenda, and President Barack Obama has been trying to deal with many of these issues, despite obstructionism and stalemate caused by the Republican control of the House of Representatives.
But national security and defense, and the possibility of armed conflict in Europe, related to NATO and the European Union, may force the hand of President Obama and his successor to focus more on foreign policy in the next Presidential term of office.
In a way, it reminds us of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940, able to run for a third term, and seen as the only legitimate person to be our President in the midst of an international crisis, the victory of the Axis Powers in Europe and Asia, at that time. Alternative possible candidates, such as Senator Robert Taft of Ohio, Senator Arthur Vandenberg of Michigan, Vice President John Nance Garner of Texas, and Senator Burton Wheeler of Montana, were all isolationists, the wrong viewpoint at the time. When Wendell Willkie came along as a surprise opponent of FDR, it was clear that on foreign policy, they had an agreement, which was good for the nation as it faced the likelihood of engagement in World War II.
Now, of course, an experienced and wise President in foreign policy, not rushing into conflict, and using his diplomatic skills, is ineligible to be President for another term, so it becomes extremely important that the proper person be elected to succeed Barack Obama.
When one looks at the cast of characters on the Republican side, and the alternatives on the Democratic side, it is clear that ONLY three potential future Presidents meet the need for appropriate foreign policy experience in a delicate and dangerous time, as we may now be entering. Not only is there the threat of war in Europe over Ukraine or other Russian attempt at advancement west, but also the looming threat of Iran and North Korea, as well as the Syrian Civil War and its effect on the entire Middle East, and the growing influence of China.
So reality tells us ONLY Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Jon Huntsman fit the bill to be our Commander in Chief, based on their experiences, expertise, and skills!
There are other Democrats who have positive aspects, but do NOT have the diplomatic experience of Clinton, Biden and Huntsman.
On the GOP side, it is literally horrifying to imagine a Chris Christie, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Bobby Jindal, Mike Huckabee, or anyone else as Commander in Chief, with many of them purely ignorant, or bullyish, or extreme in their rhetoric, or in the case of Rand Paul, a flaming isolationist! Only Jeb Bush, conceivably, due to his intelligence and connection to his dad, but not his brother, MIGHT be otherwise acceptable, but not with the same sense of confidence in Clinton, Biden and Huntsman!
So the best we can hope for is a Clinton-Huntsman or Biden-Huntsman race for the security and safety of our nation, because we would know that any one of them could perform well as our 45th President, and do the best we can hope for in the area of foreign policy!
Great history lesson and quite insightful. Thanks
Key question is, “Is the country ‘Bushed’ out?”
After Hillary’s recent speeches including appeals to idealism to students at Tempe, AZ, a nuanced foreign policy speech to the American Jewish Congress and appeals to Univ. of Miami students to get involved, it’s hard to imagine her not running in 2016 (barring unforeseen events).
I also can’t imagine Andrew Cuomo wanting to step in front of this buzzsaw.
~ A recent PEW survey shows that among Democrats, an overwhelming share of liberals (87%) want to see Hillary Clinton run and nearly as many (83%) say there is a good chance they would vote for her.
~ A recent Gallup poll asked the public about the most positive and negative aspects of a hypothetical Hillary Clinton Oval Office. A woman finally running the White House would be the most positive aspect of a Hillary Clinton presidency, according to the new survey. The poll found 18 percent of people name the historic nature of her possible presidency as its most positive aspect. Another 9 percent cite her experience in general or on foreign policy.
Last night in Tempe, AZ a student from UC Berkeley received a standing ovation when she asked if Clinton would consider joining the race. She said: “Ms. Clinton, if you don’t represent women in politics in America as future president, then who will?”
I think Democratic women will be a force in 2016 than won’t be easily denied.
If you take the supposition that HRC is the 2016 Democratic nominee, I think Virginia is the cornerstone (firewall) of her Electoral College strategy.
I start with a somewhat conservative base of 253 EVs (includes NV and excludes CO, IA, OH, NH, VA, FL from Obama’s 2012 EV total). If you add in Virginia’s 13 EVs, HRC then only needs to pick up New Hampshire’s 4 EVs or any one of the other remaining swing states.
With a Democrat as Governor, I’m quite optimistic that Virginia will be a blue state in 2016. As Larry Sabato said, Terry McAuliffe’s victory gives Hillary Clinton “a Southern base of operations.”
In the 2013 VA Governor’s race, the African American turnout was roughly 20%, which bodes well for 2016. If the 2016 Virginia AA turnout is 19% (or probably even 18%), I think Virginia surely goes blue in 2016.
In 2016 you can bet that John Lewis will be campaigning arm and arm with Hillary in Richmond and Pres. Obama will be doing robocalls.
It’s also worth remembering that McAuliffe won the 2013 VA Governor election by 3% but only received 36% of the white vote.
Besides demographics being better in Virginia in 2016 for the Democratic nominee, I’m almost certain Gov. McAuliffe will expand felon voter rights, as he said in his 2013 campaign. Of the 350,000 disenfranchised Virginia felons released from jail, 242,000(roughly 69%) are African American.
HRC will fight for Virginia and Florida with everything she’s got. I think her recent speech at the Univ. of Miami and her efforts at assuaging the African American community are examples of how important she views these two states in here bid for the presidency.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/us/politics/eye-on-2016-clintons-rebuild-bond-with-blacks.html?_r=0
I’m also going to stick my neck out and say that Hillary chooses a “white guy” for her running mate and that the white guy will be a senator from Virginia (Mark Warner or Tim Kaine).
Bob, thanks for your own insightful commentary. You are a great addition to my readership, and I want to encourage you to continue to do so.
What you say about Hillary selecting either Mark Warner or Tim Kaine rings sensible and likely, but do not forget someone such as San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, or even his brother, Congressman Joaquin Castro.
If you have either one, in theory, you get both, a reminder of what Hillary said when Bill Clinton was running in 1992. I mean, think of it, who would be able to tell the difference between Julian and Joaquin, so they could spell each other! LOL HAHAHAHA! 🙂
Having the Castro brothers as the 2016 Democratic Vice Presidential nominee would indeed be exciting and fun to watch.
I just think that with the GOP stiffing immigration reform and sticking their finger, knuckles and whole fist in the eye of the African American community, the Democratic nominee should do well with the minorities in 2016.
That said, HRC could wrap up the 2016 Presidential election by going with a vanilla team that pulls in some white married women and a few racially conservative white men that went with the GOP in 2012.