We’ll get to the local electoral politics of the day shortly. But in the meantime, John Fund hits on something today that I somehow missed last week: an apparent movement to have Hillary Clinton replace Joe Biden on the Democratic ticket in 2012.
Writing on The Wall Street Journal’s website, Fund notes:
Former Virginia Gov. Doug Wilder, his state’s first African-American governor, touched off the controversy. Writing at Politico.com last week, Mr. Wilder argued that Mr. Biden’s tenure has been undistinguished and chock full of “too many YouTube moments.” He charged that Mr. Biden “has continued to undermine what little confidence the public may have had in him.”
By way of contrast, Mr. Wilder says that Hillary Clinton has excelled in her role. “Clinton has been nothing but a team player who has earned good marks since being asked to serve as secretary of state.” Having Mrs. Clinton join the 2012 ticket, he said, would revive the Democratic Party and reestablish the party’s working-class voters who found her appealing during the 2012 primaries against Mr. Obama.
Pundits jumped on Mr. Wilder’s comments and expressed near-universal approval. On his syndicated national show, Chris Matthews of MSNBC assembled a panel to discuss the Wilder intervention. Howard Fineman of Newsweek, a longtime Hillary watcher, said Mrs. Clinton would accept a place on the 2012 ticket “in a second.” John Heilemann, a reporter New York magazine, said the major obstacle would be to “figure out a way for Biden to slide aside happily” and suggested that Mr. Biden replace Mrs. Clinton as Secretary of State.
Along the way, Mr. Heilemann outlined why President Obama just might want to have a steadier hand at his side for his re-election campaign: “The Republican attack on Obama is going to revolve around ‘too liberal,’ but also ‘too incompetent.’ . . . They’re going to say, ‘Look, you hired this guy. He was too young for this job. He didn’t know what he was doing. He didn’t have the experience, and look what’s happened.’”
So, let me get this straight: For eight years, Democrats complained that Dick Cheney was too powerful a vice president and ran the show for George W. Bush. Now we have a (Democratic) vice president whom the public doesn’t take very seriously, and that’s supposed to be the reason for President Obama’s very serious problems?
And not only that, but the answer is to take someone “who has earned good marks” out of the Cabinet — a place where, let’s be honest, “good marks” have not been the norm for this administration — and put her in a position that, as the left told us ad nauseum during the Bush years, is not supposed to be all that important?
And not only that, but the answer is furthermore to take the gaffe-prone Biden and put him in the role of chief diplomat?
And this is supposed to be a way to convince the American public that the Obama adminstration is becoming more, not less, competent??