First off, I support the election of Hillary Clinton. For Senate.
Like many people on this site, however, I'm not exactly ready to support her primary bid for the presidency should she choose to run.
This is not a definitive decision, just one I've arrived at given my own studies of politics, and it's a decision not likely to change unless she impresses me between now and 2008 with an approach that does not appear contrived to sew up the presidential primary, or ultimately, the election.
In other words, I need to see something genuine from this prospective nominee, a gesture or series of gestures that demonstrate the strength of her commitment to her constituents in NY, those potential constituents elsewhere in this nation, and ultimately to the ideals she claims to hold dear.
And while I say that I will not fall for the contrived adoptions and maneuvers that could sway the more liberal (or conservative) among us, I would like to offer her and her managers a prepackaged bit of advice regarding a strategy that, no matter how contrived, could still sway my decision come primary time 2008.
The advice is this:
Drop half of your campaign war chest on congressional races. Now. Period.
According to reports regarding her war chest, "(s)he had $22 million at the end of June." With her Senate bid safely in the Democratic column, we can assume that the majority of those funds will be used to explore the possibilities of a presidential bid, and support the bid should that decision be made.
What benefit would the extra 10 million dollars in her coffers make come 2008? In my estimation, very little.
However, putting a large portion of that money to work right now, in Congressional races across the country, would not only shore up the prospects of Democratic candidates this election cycle, but also may be interpreted as a selfless move by her... giving cash to the cause rather than keeping it for her own ambitions.
Although such a move could also be called calculated, and may backfire if Hillary's funds where brought to bear clumsily on a race where her name alone is enough to make the mouthbreathers run for their pitch forks, I believe it could be carried off through the DCCC and DSCC in a manner that does not allow for painting the contributions as 'tainted' (which would be the obvious pushback from GOP operatives and candidates).
The idea for this simple move came via an article at The Next Hurrah, where Charlie Cook is quoted:
On a conference call today, James Carville suggested that the Democratic Party should expand beyond just the top targeted races. He believes the party should help fund previously ignored Democratic challengers in second- and third-tier districts--the next 30 to 50 Republican-held seats--to fully capitalize on this environment and help those candidates maximize their chances of winning. Carville went as far as to suggest Democrats go to the bank and borrow $5 million. If I were them, I'd make it $10 million and put $500,000 each of these 20 districts.
Also, this alert from Josh Marshall regarding recent GOP ad buys is enough to set a body to thinking...
$424,948.80 against Democratic challenger Darcy Burner in the WA-8;
$571,073.60 against Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy in PA-8;
$657,276.80 against Democratic challenger Joe Sestak in PA-7;
$652,884.80 against Democratic challenger Lois Murphy in PA-6;
$579,187.60 against Democrat Zack Space in the race for Bob Ney's open OH-18 seat;
$521,985.88 against Democratic incumbent Rep. Melissa Bean in IL-8;
$436,881.00 against Democratic challenger Ron Klein in FL-22;
$417,933.39 against Democratic challenger Ken Lucas in KY-4;
ETC...
So here, in this diary is a suggestion, a strategy for Hillary to not only gain some grudging respect from the doubters and skeptics on the liberal side of the fence here, but also to contribute mightily to the goal of electing a Congress with some real teeth for the next few years. A cost benefit analysis might likely show it is the best move for her at this stage in the game, as those who care most deeply about this election cycle are the ones most apt to vote in the next presidential primary.
The chess advice for Sen. Clinton, again, is:
Drop half of your campaign war chest on congressional races. Now. Period.
This move may yield some surprising fruit.