Unelectable

In the fall 2006, the American people decided they were tired of the direction their nation was headed and shifted their faith from the ruling Republican Party to the Democrats, voting to replace many Republican members of Congress and giving the Democratic Party majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.\nHopefully you actually remember all of that.\nThat midterm election was the first time in quite a while that the Democrats had appeared to have any kind of strength. After all, the party couldn’t find anyone who could win the 2004 presidential election, even in a year where many Americans were willing to vote simply for anyone who was “not George W. Bush.”\nThere is a sentiment that for a Democrat in 2008, the presidential election should be a walk in the park. However, there is one way that the Democrats could nearly ensure defeat, or at the very least ensure four years of probable gridlock in Washington.\nThat decision would be choosing Hillary Clinton as its nominee for president.\nUnderstand this: I’m not implying that Clinton is in any way a bad person. I’ve never met her. That’s for others to decide. I’m also not saying that I particularly disagree with any or all of her policies. I feel that her problems transcend the issues that should be at the forefront of any presidential race.\nBased on the events of the 2006 midterm elections and on the general feel of politics as a whole since then, it seems that the American people want their government to do a major course correction. At the risk of trotting out what is becoming an overused term — they want change. However, in order for any real change to come about in this country, Democrats and Republicans in all parts of government will have to work together, and the people of the nation will have to come to some agreements. To use a familiar phrase, the next president will have to be a uniter, not a divider.\nSenator Clinton doesn’t really seem to fit this bill. The cold and unfortunate truth is that many, if not most Republicans — for whatever reason — harbor a strong dislike for her. Should Hillary Clinton receive the Democratic nomination, it’s likely that the result would be an unprecedented movement among Republicans against her. \nEven if there wasn’t such a rabid dislike of her, it would be unlikely that she would have much of a shot in a general election. As mentioned earlier, an important factor in this election cycle is a desire for change. Despite her claims to the contrary, Clinton represents exactly the opposite to many. For nearly the past 20 years, the president of the United States has been named either Bush or Clinton. Will voters be eager to continue that streak? Probably not.\nIt’s really unfortunate, because aside from her historical and personality issues, she would probably make a very good president. However, her nomination would be a death knell for the Democrats’ chances in 2008.