I don’t know if it’s been fully conveyed how dispiriting it was to watch the faintly peevish, baggy-eyed Hillary Clinton explain the Eghazi situation yesterday. I was “interested” and not unreceptive to her explanations for the most part, but at the same it began to hit me like a ton of bricks or a truckful of sand that she’s the same brittle, prickly Hillary I came to dislike and gradually loathe during the ’08 primary campaign. I’m presuming that a lot of lefties out there were, like me, suddenly going “oh, God…another 20 months of this and then, if she wins, four years of a sufficiently status-quo, center-rightish but far-from-inspiring, anything-but-forward-looking Clinton administration?”
George Clooney
Hillary Clinton
After years of believing that Hillary would be all but undefeatable if she runs in ’16, for the first time it occured to me that she could actually conceivably lose, and all of a sudden I felt the pangs of fear. Well, the tickle of nerves. She could lose, she really could. I feel a certain way when President Obama speaks and smiles and occasionally laughs, but when I think of that Hillary cackle…
But Elizabeth Warren, who inspires people on both sides of the fence because of her conviction and fervor about income inequality, is said to be uninterested in running, and Bernie Sanders, an honorable and very tough-minded Senator who gets income inequality as fully as Warren does, hasn’t an electoral prayer. Someone more dynamically appealing and electable than Hillary has to at least run against her in the primaries if not steal away the nomination, and so why not — I’m completely, 100% serious — George Clooney?