Democratic Convergence: Hillary ’16, Obama ’14

Obama Third TermThere is a powerful and profound convergence of interest between Team Obama, Team Clinton, and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.

The prime directive for the leadership strata of Democrats in Washington and the Democratic base nationally is clear and well understood by most national political players, if not yet the political media. This three-stage convergence of interest is as follows:

First, the goal is to elect a Democratic House and preserve the Democratic Senate in 2014. This would effectively power-start a third term for President Obama that would begin after the election of a Democratic House and Senate in 2014 and conclude with the inauguration of the next president in January 2017, which would set the stage for a ground-shaking, history-making and FDR-magnitude-realigning Democratic campaign in 2016 and a power-started Hillary Clinton presidency with even more House and Senate Democrats by January 2017.

What is striking about the political situation in April 2013 is the magnitude of the convergence of interests between all leading Democratic players, and the fact that this convergence is informally but widely understood and increasingly being acted upon by leading Democratic players.

The internal dynamics of Republican politics, which drive the GOP far to the right of mainstream America, alienating the center and motivating the left, are custom-designed to cement and energize the Democratic convergence of interests as well.

For example, Obama has publicly stated his strong commitment to elect a Democratic House in 2014. I can report, from my own information based on long experience working for Democratic leaders and from recent conversations with those privy to their current thinking, that House Democratic leaders are exceptionally pleased with the support they are receiving from the president.

There is much discussion about Obama having “limited time” to achieve goals that would define his legacy. This is not necessarily true. If a Democratic House and Senate are elected in 2014, it would re-empower Obama for one of the strongest closing two years of an eight-year presidency in modern history, which could avoid lame-duck status almost entirely with what historians would ultimately describe as “Obama’s third term.”

Obama and his advisers are wise to act on this convergence of interest and go all-out to elect a Democratic House and Senate in 2014.

This convergence is equally clear for Clinton, who, if she is runs in 2016, wants the enthusiastic support of Obama and his faithful, and if she is elected, wants a Democratic Congress to enact her agenda.

If the Democratic scenario prevails in 2014, historians will divide the Obama presidency into three distinct mini-terms. The first lasted from January 2009 until Election Day 2010, the second from January 2011 until Election Day 2014, and the third Obama term would last from the swearing-in of the next Congress in January 2015 until the inauguration of the next president in January 2017.

For these reasons I formally endorse Hillary Clinton for president. I endorse pro-Hillary super-PACs and grassroots movements, call for Clinton to be nominated by acclamation, and advise the excellent Democrats who would run if she does not to formally do the same.

Now is the time for the women to lead; 2016 will be the time for THIS woman to lead.

Brent BudowskyThe prime directive is not idle Hillary chatter by the pundit class counting the months before the Iowa caucus. It is to understand the convergence of interests, seize the historic moment, elect a Democratic Congress and lift our sights, raise our vision, elevate our aspirations and escalate our actions — beginning now, through 2014, through 2015 and through 2016.

It is time to pass the torch from the extremism, division and obstruction of Republicans to the leadership of opportunity and aspiration that was ignited with the election of Obama — and would be culminated by the election of President Hillary Clinton.

Brent Budowsky
The Hill

Wednesday, 10 April 2013

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Comments

  1. larrylunts says

    If Obama follows through on his plan to throw seniors under the bus with cuts to Social Security, I cannot see this happening. Although I worked for Obama during the 2008, 2010, and 2012 campaigns and realize that the GOP is not an alternative, I will not be voting for any candidates in 2016 who vote for chained CPI.

  2. Jay says

    Mr. Budowsky’s powers of prediction leave much to be desired. Obviously, he has not reviewed the actual political situation that exists at the moment.After the 2012 election, there are simply not enough competitive House seats for the Democrats to re-take the House. I would refer you to the 2010 election which was a lot more important than anyone realized except the Republicans who did a wonderful job at the state level of reapportionment. In PA alone, there are now 6 House seats the Republicans have that they didn’t have in 2008. None of them are considered competitive. If you can’t win any of those seats back, you can’t re-take the the House. The situation is the same in state after state were the Republicans controlled the reapportionment process. Had the Democrats not lost 63 seats in the House in 2010 due to Obama’s first two years, you would not be looking at such a bleak situation. In the Senate, the only reason the Republicans do not control that body is that they keep picking terrible candidates to run where Democrats are vulnerable. Don’t expect that to be repeated this time. Already they have recruited top tier candidates in Louisiana, W. Virginia, and S. Dakota. I believe those 3 seats are lost for sure bringing the Republican total to 48 in the Senate assuming Democrats can hold a couple other vulnerable seats. Republicans have no seats that look vulnerable unless they get some retirements not yet announced.

  3. dusty says

    Brent, why would any good democrat want to support a Democratic administration that has proposed cuts in Social Security and Medicare? These are the hallmark programs that Democrats fought for and won as victories for the American people over the past 80 years and now Barack Obama has opened the discourse again on harming these programs instead of defending them and increasing the benefits. He could have moved toward medicare for all and made the US more competitive for business by removing medical care onto the commons for all folks.

  4. Alan8 says

    Why would we want to “…re-empower Obama for one of the strongest closing two years of an eight-year presidency in modern history”?

    Your Democrats have brought us:

    The NDAA, “free-trade” agreements, kill lists, trashing OUR Constitution, helping the Republicans cut Social Security, no single-payer health care, unlabeled genetically-modified frankenfoods in our supermarkets, letting the health-care corporations gouge us, illegal wars slaughtering civilians, drones over America, government wiretapping of citizens’ private communications, easily-hackable voting machines, helping the Republicans destroy OUR post office, the Patriot Act, brutally attacking peaceful Occupy demonstrators with militarized police, no prosecutions of the Bush-Administration torturers, and no prosecutions of the criminal bankers that trashed our economy,

    Your fascist party is part of the problem!

    My support goes to the Green Party.

    • Gary100 says

      Wow!!! I’m glad someone is keeping a list.
      And add the FISA vote before he was elected president.
      He has proven himself to be the Trojan Horse of the rar right.
      – Gary

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *