Bill Krystol prediction regarding Clinton endorsement

"After Dean wins Iowa, Bill Clinton will endorse General Clark as the guy that can save the party"

He was just on Fox News saying this, personally I doubt it, but it was an interesting comment none the less. He also said that NH likes a fresh guy on the charge referring to Clark.

edit: Krystol is of course in the PNAC neo-con group.

Politics can change like the whether, ya know.

This guy has a lousy track record when it comes to predictions about Democrats.

While I wish very much that Clinton would endorse Clark, I don't think it's going to happen until after Clark locks the nomination up.

DTH

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Clintons endorse Clark to "save the party" since they both backed BushCorp and the IWR.

I would love to see Clark refuse their "endorsement" if it should come.

:7

Good call!

:hi:

I predict that Ebeneezer Scrooge will endorse Bush* and then have a change of heart when he sees how many people are hungry as a result of his policies.

Its just an opinion by a neo-con, but Krystol always impressed me with his political saavy.

You can't say he hasn't played a big role in politics since Reagan or earlier. Obviously I do not agree with his ideology, doesn't mean he doesn't know how to play the game.

We should keep track of how often they are right.

i know it wont happen. but i would love for it to happen just to see what the media whores say about it.

this year. But I will concede that an actual endorsement by Big Dog for anybody is unlikely. It just doesn't seem like his kind of play.

Or am I confused about that? I can't remember exactly when he said it, but I have a distinct impression that he said he would endorse our *nominee*, leading me to believe he wouldn't endorse a primary candidate...

quit allowing Republican's to define our candidates and what they are going to do - and we end up fighting about it - just what they love so they will keep it up.

who focus on "remaking" the party should take a hard look at their priorities.

Clark is running to save our democracy. And yes, that means a viable two party system with checks and balances. It also means a Democratic Party able to compete on a national level. If taking our party back means shrinking it to the point where ideology overrides people driven policy, then be prepared to become irrelevant on the national stage. I'll take a broad-based party that moves this country foreward rather than backs it into a corner. For one to be progressive, you must be making progress.

As usual.

The electoral map has changed because of the census, the Republicans have a clear advantage over us, and we are fighting for our two-party system. Ideology gets us nowhere right now, we must operate strategically.

It doesn't take a political genius to figure this out.

Though I was surprised when Gore joined the Dean camp........

I don't watch TV and rely on DU to give me an idea of what is happening "out there." Kristol is just throwing an idea out there in the off chance he could be right. He will consider himself right if Clinton endorses Clark, at all, during the nomination process. "See I told you. OK, I'm two months off, but I was right, wasn't I?"

Prez Gore was an exception, and given that he didn't
get to move into the white house to impact his party
I think it was perfectly appropriate for him to do so.

But I doubt that Clinton would endorse; he's a pretty traditional
guy in many ways.

I'd be surprised if Clinton endorsed anybody before the eventually nominee was chosen. But I could be wrong...

First Delay and Matalin, now Krystol. Aren't these guys nice? So helpful!

Seriously, it is interesting the lengths to which the right is going to try to select for us. (To select ABD, that is.) Rove, Delay and Matalin are doing the rather unsophisticated reverse psychology thing. "Ooooh, give us Dean!" (Implication being that they plan to mop the floor with him.) Ask yourself, if that was true, WHY would these partisan hacks tip their hand and tell us that? Answer: because they want us to get VERY AFRAID and pick one of the others.

Krystol's approach is more intelligent and sophisticated, but has the same goal. He's implying that even the Big Dog is scared Dean can't win. This is a smart thing because it may be true. Or it may be simply that the BIG DOG doesn't want Dean to win. (Either way, same implication: we should be VERY AFRAID too, and pick someone else.)

The bottom line of all this, the thing you can take to the bank, is that NO ONE on the right wants Dean to be the Democratic nominee.

It almost is that simple. They almost always think something terribly diveous is taking place at all times. No Clinton could possibly care about the good of the country, they are always planning what is best for them seems to be the Repubs base line assumption. Hence all the Clark as stalking horse Clinton tool talk.

Maybe Krystol is right about this, but I doubt it too, and like I said, I always suspect their reasons for whatever it is they say about a Clinton.