It’s interesting, probably, to consider that Hillary Clinton is running for the Presidency by the same rationale that Bush the Younger had: because of her propinquity to the power of the Presidency. We certainly regard the sons and grandsons of Presidents as somehow suitable to the office —and it’s no great leap at all to think of a First Lady as nakedly ambitious as Hillary is to be likewise a possible President. Like Bush, though, Hillary knew she would have to pay her dues first, so she ran and won a seat in the United States Senate, just as ”W” had run for and won the governorship of Texas.
Of course, neither Hillary nor Bush the Younger have spent much time being explicit about this rationale because it would probably strike most of us as illogical at best and dynastic-minded at worst. Her experience as a First Lady entitles her to what? Well, as she fancies herself, somehow, an Eleanor Roosevelt rediviva, it is not entirely without precedent that many people would take her candidacy seriously. I know I do. I don’t like her a lot of the time and I would never vote for her when I can vote for a John McCain, but I have always had a special regard for her and her obvious intelligence and toughness. So, I “get” her candidacy. And it wasn’t entirely out of a desire for mischief that I voted for her in Texas’ open primary last month.
I just wish that she had gone negative on Barack Obama much earlier. It would have helped her and the rest of us dispense with the absurdity of Obama’s candidacy when the chance was still there.