"In an excellent column following release of the inspector general’s report, National Review’s John Fund envisioned the increasingly plausible implosion of Clinton’s candidacy — i.e., a scenario in which Democrats dump her owing to her metastasizing legal woes, coupled with her extraordinarily high negatives (general disapproval, untrustworthiness, unlikability, etc.). The latter are set in stone after a quarter-century’s antics.Relatedly, on Twitter, I floated the possibility that Democrats could resort to the “Torricelli Solution.”
In October 2002, seeking reelection while beset by an indefensible corruption investigation, Senator Robert Torricelli was badly trailing his Republican rival, Doug Forrester, as the race came down to the wire — no small thing in the blue Garden State.
At the eleventh hour (actually, more like after the twelfth hour), Democrats persuaded “the Torch” to step aside.
Into his place they slid 78-year-old Frank Lautenberg, a reliably partisan former senator.
The lateness of the switcheroo denied Republicans a meaningful opportunity to campaign against Lautenberg, in violation of state election laws.
But New Jersey’s solidly Democratic judiciary predictably looked the other way.
Overnight, the polls flipped and Lautenberg won going away.
The point of my tweet was to poll the Twitterverse about who might play Lautenberg to Hillary’s Torricelli.
The consensus choice was Vice President Joe Biden, who appeared poised to enter the race months back and seems to have been chomping at the bit ever since.
There was also a common inkling that Elizabeth Warren would be chosen as veep and heiress apparent.
The hard-left senator is a natural choice: She would appease not only lefty women dismayed by Hillary’s implosion but also socialist Bernie Sanders supporters, who are the energy in the party at the moment."
No comments:
Post a Comment