For Some Democrats, Taking On Hillary Clinton Isn’t Such a Crazy Idea

Running against her has potential upsides despite the Sisyphean task.

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 09: U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), talks about big banks during a news conference on Capitol Hill, April 9, 2013 in Washington, DC. Sen. Sanders and Rep. Sherman announced legislation to break up big banks that are bigger now than before a taxpayer bailout following the 2008 financial crisis. 
Getty Images
Alex Seitz Wald
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Alex Seitz-Wald
March 17, 2014, 1 a.m.

Would any Demo­crat in his or her right mind chal­lenge Hil­lary Clin­ton in 2016? Well, yeah, ac­tu­ally.

To call her a pro­hib­it­ive front-run­ner is a com­ic­al un­der­state­ment — she has a lock on the Demo­crat­ic money ma­chine, un­pre­ced­en­ted sup­port from the party’s base, and a pseudo-cam­paign ready and wait­ing for her to take charge. Is there a po­ten­tial Barack Obama lurk­ing out there? “I don’t see any­body on the ho­ri­zon right now,” says a former seni­or ad­viser to the 2008 cam­paign that beat Clin­ton. “She’s in a more dom­in­ant po­s­i­tion than any­one I’ve seen in an open-seat race prob­ably in my life­time.”

Even from the left, which was her weak­ness six years ago, it would be hard to find much trac­tion. A re­cent Pew poll found that 87 per­cent of self-iden­ti­fied lib­er­al Demo­crats want Clin­ton to run, with 83 per­cent say­ing there’s a good chance they would vote for her. Com­pare that with Novem­ber 2006, when Pew asked a sim­il­ar ques­tion and found only 39 per­cent of Demo­crats who said they would like to see Clin­ton win the nom­in­a­tion.

But there’s more than one reas­on to run for pres­id­ent.

If someone de­cides to take the plunge against Clin­ton, he or she would likely have ul­teri­or motives. Some might try to move Clin­ton in a cer­tain dir­ec­tion or force her to take an ideo­lo­gic­al stand. Oth­ers might hope to raise their pro­files, either for a job in a po­ten­tial Clin­ton ad­min­is­tra­tion or to po­s­i­tion them­selves for the fu­ture. “There’s go­ing to be a primary. And if there is a primary, there’s go­ing to be people push­ing a strong pro­gress­ive po­s­i­tion,” says Charles Cham­ber­lain, the ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of Demo­cracy for Amer­ica, a lib­er­al grass­roots or­gan­iz­ing group.

Take in­de­pend­ent Sen. Bernie Sanders, the self-de­scribed so­cial­ist from Ver­mont who has long been a proud voice on the Demo­crat­ic Party’s left. He has said pub­licly that he’s “pre­pared” to run, even if it’s against Clin­ton.

“People are hurt­ing, and it is im­port­ant for lead­er­ship now to ex­plain to them why they are hurt­ing and how we can grow the middle class and re­verse the eco­nom­ic de­cline of so many people. And I don’t think that is the polit­ics of Sen­at­or Clin­ton or the Demo­crat­ic es­tab­lish­ment,” he told The Na­tion. “People want to hear an al­tern­at­ive set of policies.”

There’s also Bri­an Sch­weitzer, the former gov­ernor of Montana, who is one of the few Demo­crats who has said pub­licly that he’d chal­lenge Clin­ton. His views are idio­syn­crat­ic enough (pro-gun, pro-oil, pro-single-pay­er health care) that he doesn’t clearly rep­res­ent any par­tic­u­lar wing of the party, yet he could po­ten­tially tap in­to rur­al pop­u­list sen­ti­ment.

Oth­er names men­tioned by some on the left in­clude Rus­sell Fein­gold, the former sen­at­or from Wis­con­sin. He’s also rumored to be eye­ing a run for his old Sen­ate seat in 2016. Or Howard Dean, who sought the pres­id­ency in 2004. Would he run? “You nev­er say nev­er,” Dean has told re­port­ers who ask. Fein­gold and Dean both have their own grass­roots or­gan­iz­ing groups, which could amp­li­fy their voices and form the found­a­tion of a cam­paign if they entered the race.

Protest can­did­ates are noth­ing new, of course. It’s what Ron Paul has done with his re­peated at­tempts to win the Re­pub­lic­an nom­in­a­tion, and what Jesse Jack­son did when he sought the Demo­crat­ic nod in 1984 and 1988. Neither won, but both raised the sa­li­ence of is­sues they cared about and forced the even­tu­al nom­in­ee to re­spond to them.

Bey­ond ideo­lo­gic­al am­bi­tions, the oth­er main reas­on to launch a Sis­yphean pres­id­en­tial bid would be to play the long game. Run­ning for pres­id­ent can raise a politi­cian’s na­tion­al pro­file, and help build con­nec­tions with donors and loc­al party lead­ers and act­iv­ists. Mary­land Gov. Mar­tin O’Mal­ley is the name that im­me­di­ately comes to Demo­crats’ minds here. He’s openly eye­ing a run, wheth­er Clin­ton gets in the race or not. At 51, O’Mal­ley has some time on his side. But he’s term-lim­ited out of of­fice this year, mean­ing he’s look­ing for a new job that would keep him rel­ev­ant. And while he could be a strong pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate, one Mary­land polit­ic­al in­sider men­tioned sev­er­al Cab­in­et po­s­i­tions, in­clud­ing sec­ret­ary of Home­land Se­cur­ity, as oth­er prizes.

But one po­ten­tial can­did­ate is not like the oth­ers.

The only Demo­crat who — at least as things look right now — could be a threat to Clin­ton is Vice Pres­id­ent Joe Biden. In early polls, he’s show­ing strength that comes closest to (al­though still far from) Clin­ton’s num­bers. While most Demo­crats in Wash­ing­ton are pretty con­vinced he would nev­er chal­lenge Clin­ton, with whom he en­joys warm re­la­tions by all ac­counts, he’s said pub­licly that his de­cision would not de­pend on hers.

“The only reas­on to run for the pres­id­ent of the United States is if you truly be­lieve you are bet­ter po­si­tioned to do what is most needed in the coun­try,” Biden told Bar­bara Wal­ters last month on The View. “My ex­per­i­ence uniquely po­s­i­tions me.”

And even though Clin­ton­world seems in­tent on avoid­ing one, a con­ten­tious primary could ac­tu­ally be good for Clin­ton. It was only after her loss in Iowa in 2008, when her aura of in­vin­cib­il­ity went out the win­dow, that Clin­ton turned her cam­paign around.

“There’s noth­ing par­tic­u­larly ap­peal­ing about in­ev­it­ab­il­ity. There’s noth­ing good about tac­tics get­ting out in front of mes­sage,” the Obama ad­viser said of Hil­lary’s second run. “Hil­lary was, I think, not a very good can­did­ate in 2007 and then a very, very good can­did­ate in 2008, be­cause once all that oth­er stuff went away — the in­ev­it­ab­il­ity — and then once she was kind of a plucky chal­lenger, she really began to ar­tic­u­late a mes­sage that res­on­ated with people more read­ily.”

Does Clin­ton really want to head un­tested in­to a gen­er­al-elec­tion fight against a Re­pub­lic­an who has just emerged vic­tori­ous from what prom­ises to be a bruis­ing primary battle?

Maybe, in at least some small way, she should be grate­ful to any Demo­crat who has the guts to do it.

What We're Following See More »
Republican Polling Shows Close Race
Roundup: National Polling Remains Inconsistent
4 hours ago

The national polls, once again, tell very different stories: Clinton leads by just one point in the IBD, Rasmussen, and LA Times tracking polls, while she shows a commanding 12 point lead in the ABC news poll and a smaller but sizable five point lead in the CNN poll. The Republican Remington Research Group released a slew of polls showing Trump up in Ohio, Nevada, and North Carolina, a tie in Florida, and Clinton leads in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia. However, an independent Siena poll shows Clinton up 7 in North Carolina, while a Monmouth poll shows Trump up one in Arizona

Colin Powell to Vote for Clinton
7 hours ago
Cook Report: Dems to Pick up 5-7 Seats, Retake Senate
9 hours ago

Since the release of the Access Hollywood tape, on which Donald Trump boasted of sexually assaulting women, "Senate Republicans have seen their fortunes dip, particularly in states like Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada and Pennsylvania," where Hillary Clinton now leads. Jennifer Duffy writes that she now expects Democrats to gain five to seven seats—enough to regain control of the chamber.

"Of the Senate seats in the Toss Up column, Trump only leads in Indiana and Missouri where both Republicans are running a few points behind him. ... History shows that races in the Toss Up column never split down the middle; one party tends to win the lion’s share of them."

Tying Republicans to Trump Now an Actionable Offense
11 hours ago

"Some Republicans are running so far away from their party’s nominee that they are threatening to sue TV stations for running ads that suggest they support Donald Trump. Just two weeks before Election Day, five Republicans―Reps. Bob Dold (R-Ill.), Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), David Jolly (R-Fla.), John Katko (R-N.Y.) and Brian Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican running for an open seat that’s currently occupied by his brother―contend that certain commercials paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee provide false or misleading information by connecting them to the GOP nominee. Trump is so terrible, these Republicans are essentially arguing, that tying them to him amounts to defamation."

Former Congressman Schock Fined $10,000
11 hours ago

Former Illinois GOP Congressman Aaron Schock "recently agreed to pay a $10,000 fine for making an excessive solicitation for a super PAC that was active in his home state of Illinois four years ago." Schock resigned from Congress after a story about his Downton Abbey-themed congressional office raised questions about how he was using taxpayer dollars.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.