I intially was crafting this post to respond to the notion that Hillary might not run in 2008. My short answer is that “it could happen.” But anyway, a Democratic strategist on TV asked Pat Buchanan this morning what state Kerry won that Hillary would possibly lose. Buchanan mumbled something about McCain making it competitive everywhere. Given Buchanan’s (typical) incoherence I will now do the unthinkable and help Pat Buchanan out (oh my god!)…
States Kerry won that Hillary could conceivably lose:
1. Pennsylvania- She’s too liberal socially, too conservative economically (i.e. willing to accept laiseez-faire). She’s also too close to Santorum’s view on the war in Iraq.
2. Michigan- In addition to reasons cited for Pennsylvania, she’s a dedicated free-trader-NOT a fair-trader. In Michigan-and the greater industrial Midwest-laiseez-faire free-trade is barely as popular as civil rights for blacks in Alabama circa 1963. Combined with her support for more liberal immigration laws, watch the GOP play the “immigrants are taking your jobs” card to stressed out under 50K workers in greater Midwest.
3. Wisconsin- See Michigan and Pennsylvania but add that her husband’s support of a ban on snowmobiling through federal lands to be a locval issue in which Hillary will be asked to go against the policies of her husband.
4. Oregon and Washington- These states are not oversized versions of Portland and King County. Any assumption that they are is misguided to say the least.
Finally there is the point that no evidence has been put forth that Hillary could win states Kerry lost-something she would have to do even if she carried all the Kerry states. Does anybody have any evidence that she could carry Ohio? Or Florida?
Note: The list of states above and the accompanying reasons are partial lists. Anybody who wants to contradict or add to the states and reasons should feel free to do so.