Here is what an economist wrote of her:
My two cents’ worth–and I think it is the two cents’ worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994–is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn’t smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.
So when senior members of the economic team said that key senators like Daniel Patrick Moynihan would have this-and-that objection, she told them they were disloyal. When junior members of the economic team told her that the Congressional Budget Office would say such-and-such, she told them (wrongly) that her conversations with CBO head Robert Reischauer had already fixed that. When long-time senior hill staffers told her that she was making a dreadful mistake by fighting with rather than reaching out to John Breaux and Jim Cooper, she told them that they did not understand the wave of popular political support the bill would generate. And when substantive objections were raised to the plan by analysts calculating the moral hazard and adverse selection pressures it would put on the nation’s health-care system…
Hillary Rodham Clinton has already flopped as a senior administrative official in the executive branch–the equivalent of an Undersecretary. Perhaps she will make a good senator. But there is no reason to think that she would be anything but an abysmal president.
What economist said this? Brad DeLong, Berkeley econ prof and former Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Clinton Treasury Department, writing in 2003. Link via Greg Mankiw here.
A very interesting quote. Thanks
And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn’t smart enough to realize that she was in over her head
Sounds more like the current president regarding everything he touches.
It’s certainly possible that both/either Hillary and the President have poor managerial skills and a poor grasp of policy, but I find it hard to believe either one of them lacks “political smarts”. You don’t get to be where they are without having “political smarts”.
Just an observation.
Do you agree with any this babble that you’re reprinting?
It’s hard to tell.
However, dont’ forget that HIllary clinton had to go up against entrenched interests to get anything done — sort of like you latinos have to do. Then she’s judged by what she couldn’t accomplish against these interests. Unfair? Mostly. At least she tried. More than I can say for most of the half-baked pundits out there who love to shovel their worthless drivel. Remember: those who can’t do, teach. those who can’t teach write worthless punditry criticizing people who at least got off their asses and tried to help others.
NO, I don’t even need to read this to answer that!
Yeah!!! Let hillary run for president.
It would be like a never ending gift for us republicans, but I still don’t think that she will run.
The consensus here in dc is that it will be one of the governors.
Hillary is definitely planning on running. Here in NY here “home” state, it is pretty much expected she will run. However, she likely will not even get out of the primaries given her stance on the War. She will meet the same fate that Lieberman met in CT.
12 years ago she may have been pretty ineffective in her first foray at policy, but she was a very effective Senator in a minority party. She has been a tireless advocate for NY and won an election handily. She has had enormous approval ratings across the state including upstate which is almost always a Republican stronghold.
Hmmm. Hillary running for the White House (again!), and Speaker Nancy Pelosi lighting the way…
If the Republicans cannot defeat this dynamic duo in ‘08, it’s time to dissolve the Party.
Or else… http://exhumegoldwater.wordpress.com/2006/11/15/exhume-goldwater-at-cafepress/
I doubt Hillary Clinton could even begin to approach how powerfully Bush II has damaged our country and the world. Will we be able to dig out from the damage he has caused even by the end of the century? He may well win the honor of being the worst president we have yet had.
Oh, I beg to differ. I could easily see how Hillary Clinton could do much worse than Bush II….even much worse than Carter (a milestone very hard to achieve indeed).
I would at least agree that Bush II may be the president with the most impact. He may go down in history as the president who created the debacle leading to this nation’s downfall on the world stage. We, and the rest of the world will probably be spending the better part of this century cleaning up the bloody mess he created in his playroom when nobody had the courage or the power to tell him that the world is not his plaything.
I have to agree with HP on this one. It is indeed possible for Hillary to be worse than GWB. I’m not saying she will be. I’m just saying it’s possible.
To illustrate, think back to the 2000 election. Did you have any inkling that GWB would be as horrific a President as he has become? Honestly, I had no idea. I’m ashamed to say that I actually thought there was little or no difference between Al Gore and Bush. So…
It’s certainly possible that the same could happen in the case of Hillary. Not likely. But possible.
The answer is NO!