Home >> United States & Canada >> Elections & Politics

     Email   Print 

Will The Pirro Campaign Hurt Hillary's Presidential Campaign?

Ross Kaminsky - 8/12/2005

When my friend Christoper said that Jeanine Pirro's candidacy for the Senate seat held by Hillary Clinton could mean serious trouble for the incumbent, I was skeptical. But now I'm coming around to his view, for one reason - Pirro will put serious pressure on Hillary to commit to serving a full term in the Senate, meaning that she (Hillary) will then have to break that promise if she runs for the Presidency in 2008. For those of us who shudder at the thought of another Clinton presidency, the prospect of putting Hillary in that box brings a smile to our faces.

This issue is already hurting Hillary in polls, although it seems to be moving people from the Hillary column to undecided, and not all the way to supporting Pirro who still has relatively little name recognition.

A recent poll had Hillary leading Pirro by 63 percent to 29 percent. And a WNBC/Marist poll from April showed Hillary's support leading Pirro's by 64 percent to 28 percent. However, a WNBC/Marist poll done this week has Hillary down to 50 percent with Pirro unchanged at 28 percent. All the damage seems to have been done by stirring fears that Hillary will abandon her Senate seat two years following the 2006 election to run for the Presidency.

Here are the choices for Hillary as I see them:

1) Make no promise about serving a full term in the Senate if she wins that race in 2006, leaving her free to run for the Presidency in 2008 without breaking such a promise. This will certainly give Pirro her best chance at winning the Senate race. Pirro knows that Hillary is popular in New York, but the argument that "my full time is better than her part-time" seems already to be getting enough traction that Hillary probably has to counter it, and soon. If Hillary chooses not to comment on the issue and then loses her Senate race (though she's still a favorite even if she doesn't comment, I would think) that makes her seriously damaged goods for a Presidential race...probably not a risk she wants to take.

2) Promise to serve a full term if she wins her Senate race, then keep that promise. Of course this is great in the short term for those of us who don't want to see President Hillary. But it could be good strategery for her to get some more political experience and then run for the Presidency in 2012.

3) Promise to serve a full term, then break that promise to run for the Presidency. Hillary's advisors will tell her that most voters won't care if she breaks that promise. When she announces her run for the Presidency she will simply say "I intended to keep my promise, but the current state of affairs in the country is so bad that I consider it my duty to run, despite my full intention two years ago to stay in the Senate." I would agree with Hillary's hypothetical advisors that breaking a full-Senate-term promise will not hurt Hillary much, but given the closeness of recent elections it could still be the difference between winning and losing.

I believe that scenario #3 is the most likely, #2 second most likely, and #1 least likely.

Time will tell. Meanwhile, during the past few weeks, bettors on Tradesports.com have sold Hillary's chances of being the Democratic nominee for President from about 49% to 42.5%.

Her losses have not translated into substantial gains for any other candidate, but seem to have been distributed in small quantities over several Democrats, including Evan Bayn, Bill Richardson, and John Edwards. I'm pleased to say there's no sign of new life in the bidding for John Kerry or Al Gore.