Mrs. Clinton: Courting a Dissatisfied Electorate
Mrs. Clinton is not just any secretary of state; in contrast to Mr. Obama, she is part of the traditional political elite with an extremely important position within the establishment of her political party. She has strong links with the media and the support of her husband, Bill Clinton both nationally and internationally, which is nothing to sneeze at. Recently a writer for Time Magazine ventured to say that she was on her way to becoming “a memorable secretary of state." And let us remember that her candidacy seemed destined to triumph over Bush and was defeated by the unexpected insurgency of the Obama electoral phenomenon. It is hard to imagine that she sees herself as one more high level “civil servant” in the government of a man who, coming out of nowhere, managed to snatch away her goal of becoming the first female president of her powerful nation. A look Obama’s approval ratings level should alert her to the opportunity that is again knocking at her door. If things continue to go badly, Obama could end up being a one term president. And there would be Hillary to recover, at the next opportunity, power for the Democrats. It would be necessary for the party chiefs and traditional donors to perceive her as different from the core of “true believers” in the leadership and style of Obama.
Clinton has achieved a certain success in imposing on her government, above all in relation to Latin America, a course of diplomatic action that is close to what she promised during the campaign, overlaying and at times replacing that vision of Obama that raised so many hopes in our America. It is in this context that one can understand the return to “gunboat diplomacy,” that “look at what the consequences might well be” with which Madam Clinton threatened the governments of Bolivia and Venezuela on November 12, 2009, for their “links” with Iran. The lady is courting a dissatisfied electorate.
Clinton has achieved a certain success in imposing on her government, above all in relation to Latin America, a course of diplomatic action that is close to what she promised during the campaign, overlaying and at times replacing that vision of Obama that raised so many hopes in our America. It is in this context that one can understand the return to “gunboat diplomacy,” that “look at what the consequences might well be” with which Madam Clinton threatened the governments of Bolivia and Venezuela on November 12, 2009, for their “links” with Iran. The lady is courting a dissatisfied electorate.