« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

SecState Clinton has 3 million in war chest.

Fascinating.

WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton says running for office isn’t on her “radar,” but she still has an eight-person political team and sports two overflowing campaign war chests.

Her team transformed the former Democratic White House contender’s massive campaign debts into a $3 million mountain of political cash, according to federal fund-raising records through the end of June.

[snip]

By comparison, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is up for reelection next year, had just three people on staff last quarter.

Via Andrew Malcolm, who likewise finds this fascinating.  Also, before you ask: Clinton was and is not allowed to pay herself back for the money she lent her own campaign.  That’s gone forever.

As I see it, there are three things that SecState Clinton could do with this money:

  1. Use it as seed money for other candidates (which is one of the official explanations of what she’s planning to use it for);
  2. Use it as seed money for a 2012 or 2016 Presidential run;
  3. Use it as seed money for a 2010 Senate/gubernatorial run.

My personal preference would be 3. – as long as the run was for Senate, and she was challenging Charles “Porky” Schumer.  That would be a primary fight to watch, and never mind piddling little details such as timing and/or basic inclination to get back in the Senate.  But a Governor’s slot? …Well, Paterson is weak there right now, and 3 million would be an excellent start for a primary challenge.  Assuming that the money can be transferred (over half of it is in her Senate re-election fund anyway).  2. is unlikely, unless of course the President’s numbers keep slipping; and 2016 is going to be a grim year for whatever Democrat (whose name will not be Joe Biden) gets saddled with the nomination.  So it’ll probably be 1.

…And in some ways, that might be the most interesting scenario of all.  Three million can fuel a goodly number of campaigns.  Not to mention a whole lot of payback.  Or both at the same time.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

COMMENTS

  • Repair_Man_Jack
  • Marcus_Traianus

    Some things to consider;

    - Clinton is always scheming. The move to SoS placated the party and provided her a higher perch from which she can view the carcasses. Good news/bad news- Clinton has really ticked off Jewish voters with the new policies at State. That’s bad news in NY where that group is a very important lobby. Good news for Clinton- the Jewish lobby in NY is mostly made of Democratic Party acolytes and if Clinton says “the devil made me do it” (that is Obama whose popularity is sinking like a stone) Clinton still has a chance. All food for thought.

    - Democrat voters in NY continue to vote for our collective destruction. If all the “Democratik” Party legislative members together pushed the button on a nuclear missile which wiped out half of NY’s population, their party members would probably say it was “well-intentioned”. Furthermore, so-called independents are mostly liberals in hiding. Together that gives any Republican a big hill to climb and any race will be a contest (I don’t see “Pataki like” situations occurring). Unless there is a big name involved (exempli gratia. Giuliani) the donk will be a shoe-in. Temptations abound for Clinton.

    - Cuomo. Although I can’t figure out how that affects Clinton unless he indicts her.

    - Wild cards. The voters in this state actually get ticked off, figure out that Democrats (local and state) have made the tax burden unbearable, papered the walls of unions/other big supporters with our money, have no plan beyond tax and spend and have no idea what they are doing (when they actually meet). This all presupposes their is a population of educated voters who have not left the state.

  • djemi

    Number 2 might not be that far fetched, IMHO it is but wouldn’t it be fun to watch.

    ?Business friends of Hillary Rodham Clinton have purchased the web domain name HRC2012.?

  • Scope

    literally.

  • Scope

    I can’t see Clinton running for Pres. in 2012. The one thing Dems/Libs do best, is they stick together, and, cover for one another, no matter how bad a job any one of them is doing. I don’t see any way she would run against Obama, not even as an I told you so candidate. She’s doing a really crappy job as Sec of State, and, I think promoting and pushing Obama’s agenda that she really doesn’t agree with. Patterson is very unpopular and ineffective, just as the legislature in NY. I see Clinton as thinking she could simply walk into the Governors mansion without even campaigning much. Hide the silver and china!

    What kind of chance would Guiliani have against her? He was a very popular and well liked Governor, especially right after 9/11. I thought I read somewhere that he was considering running for Gov. again.

  • Scope

    I can’t see Clinton running for Pres. in 2012. The one thing Dems/Libs do best, is they stick together, and, cover for one another, no matter how bad a job any one of them is doing. I don’t see any way she would run against Obama, not even as an I told you so candidate. She’s doing a really crappy job as Sec of State, and, I think promoting and pushing Obama’s agenda that she really doesn’t agree with. Patterson is very unpopular and ineffective, just as the legislature in NY. I see Clinton as thinking she could simply walk into the Governors mansion without even campaigning much. Hide the silver and china!

    What kind of chance would Guiliani have against her? He was a very popular and well liked Governor, especially right after 9/11. I thought I read somewhere that he was considering running for Gov. again.