|
Virtually every time one of the GOP candidates opens his pasty trap, they take for granted that Sen. Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. In fact, they often try to differentiate themselves by attacking Clinton instead of each other - it's following the Reagan quip about never attacking "thy fellow Republican."
There seems to be two possible explanations for this phenomenon:
1. They are preparing themselves for the inevitable. Polls and endorsements don't lie.
2. They are invoking the Clinton dynasty to whip up the spirits of demoralized conservatives who long for someone to focus their personal frustration on. Not only are they trying to stir up some sort of focal point for the embodiment of all that is evil, but they are making a pretty calculated effort to drive up fundraising.
On our side of the coin, Democrats invoke Dick Cheney or Ann Coulter anytime they want to get some spare change. Remember the good old days of hating Tom Delay? Good times. Putting the "checks" in "checks and balances" and what have you.
Not being a manichean zealot, I'd assume there is a little of both going on. Clinton is the frontrunner, after all.
That too is a simplification, though, since it would be like the classic claim that both Dems and Republicans took money from Enron. There is something to be said for clarifying proportion (wouldn't be nice if the media understood this principle?).
So, without trying to say these are mutually exclusive possibilities, I'm asking which you believe is the stronger rationale for invoking the name of Hillary Clinton, Hillarycare, etc.
Explanations are always welcome, naturally.
|