Hillary Clinton is not the Democrat’s version of Mitt Romney. She is worse. Not in terms of her viewpoints on political issues, but in terms of what her wealth and history of political power would symbolize for an American public once again in need of true change in the executive office.
Clinton has been viewed as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination in the 2016 race essentially since she lost in the primary to Barack Obama in 2008.
During the 2012 campaign, Romney was criticized for his ostentatious wealth, his seeming inability to connect with the non-rich American populace. Hillary Clinton is wealthy, but she is much more in tune with the importance of serving the nation’s low income citizens. In 2008, she even claimed she would institute a “poverty czar” on her Cabinet if elected president, which would be a position dedicated to “ending poverty as we know it.” The Clintons are massively wealthy, but their funds are redistributed to the global populace through well-intended initiatives like the Clinton Foundation.
Still, Clinton is a member of the nation’s elite. That status stems not only from her immense wealth, but from her lengthy career as an influential politician and as First Lady. The fact that both Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton are being discussed as potential presidential candidates symbolizes the dangerously oligarchical nature of our current government. There have been two members of the Bush family in office in recent history, separated only by one Clinton. Obama was the spark of youthful change and break from nepotism that the country needed, but even Clinton initially served on his Cabinet.
If the Republican party is smart, it will nominate its own version of Obama during the forthcoming election. Rand Paul or Marco Rubio could fill that lane. If the Democrats are smart, they will avoid another Clinton nomination. Allegations against Clinton for living a long life of privilege collecting $200,000 per speaking engagement to members of various industries have already been lobbed by members of both parties. These arguments, however, are trite compared to the true issue at hand: preserving America’s democratic dignity by refusing to consolidate power into the hands of a small elite.