Hillary Time?

I certainly hope not. But then again, what difference does it really make who's in that office any more?

As a drearily soulless, principle-free, power-hungry veteran of DC’s game of thrones, [Hillary Clinton]’s about as banal of an American politician as it gets. One of the few unique aspects to her, perhaps the only one, is how the genuinely inspiring gender milestone of her election will (following the Obama model) be exploited to obscure her primary role as guardian of the status quo.

[...]

There is genuine and intense excitement over the prospect of (another) Clinton presidency. Many significant American factions regard her elevation to the Oval Office as an opportunity for rejuvenation, as a stirring symbol of hope and change, as the vehicle for vital policy advances.

  Glenn Greenwald

But do you think they can rig enough votes? Unless the Republicans offer up one of their lame-brained or rabid candidates again (and maybe that’s what they plan to do) I don’t see a Democratic win in 2016, assuming THEIR candidate is Hillary.

So take that, cynics. There are pockets of vibrant political excitement stirring in the land over a Hillary Clinton presidency. There are posters being made, buttons being appended, checks being prepared, appointments being coveted. The joint, allied, synergistic constituencies of plutocracy and endless war have their beloved candidate.

Greenwald lists her backers as Wall Street, the Israel Lobby, war zealots, and old school neocons. I don’t see how even they can fashion her as someone most voters who turn out will cast a ballot for. Some rigging would be necessary.