Lurking not so deep within the debate over who should be the Democrat's candidate is the theory of turns. As someone who has dipped her toe into politics, this notion of turns is very much a fact. One of the first things that I was taught (outside the classroom) about politics is that "the party picks you, you don't decide to run." I think the first time I heard that I decided that running for office wasn't for me.
Trying to run for office is hard enough, fighting to be at the front of the line isn't worth it to me.
There has been a lot written that it is clearly Clinton's turn to run for President, hell to be President, and thus Obama should (have) wait(ed). The logic to that theory is one of complete bullshit.
- This 'turn' theory relies on the idea that no other super star or ass-kisser will rise up in the ranks.
- That the chosen leader won't nurture someone else to take your place.
- That you'll even be in the same place to take the opportunity.
- In Obama's case, how the hell do you guarantee that he'll win in 8 years anyway? Maybe this is the best year (as I believe) for the Democrats to retake the White House. Who the hell knows what Clinton could leave him? Look at Al Gore (without the stolen election & Gore's distancing of himself from Bill).
- That the party won't change its mind.
- That they never really wanted you in the first place and just wanted you to be the second to make the organization/party/ticket look good.
Technorati tags: Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, politics