I want Hillary Clinton to win Iowa, so the dems will lose the presidential election. That of course assumes the GOP puts up a right-center conservative who will be strong on terrorism and defense, keep taxes low and can reinvigorate the comprehensive immigration bill (that strengthens our borders, punishes employers who hired undocumented workers, creates a true temporary work program with registered (and monitored) workers that had no path to citizenship, booted violent immigrants the minute they have a felony conviction, and created allowed long term illegals who are law abiding members of our communities a path to register, pay their back taxes and get in the back of the line for citizenship – if they want to stay longer).

But putting aside the GOP race for the moment I think a Hillary win will be a disaster for the Dems. Of course Democrats are running the weakest group of candidates in history. You have two one-term Senators (Edwards and Obama) and a two term Senator-First Lady (not to mention wild-eyed Rep Kucinich). America deserves better than Boy-Obama and One-Term-Wonder Edwards. None of them have the much needed experience as an executive, in foreign policy or with terrorism. In fact, the two one-term Senators are all for immediate retreat in the face of a beaten down al-Qaeda.

I have not been that concerned about the Presidential race because of the total lack of heft on the democrat side. But a Clinton nomination would allow America an opportunity to end the Bushton-Clintush years in American politics with clarity and force. There has been a Clinton or Bush as President for coming on 20 years! If you add in the Vice Presidential years it is 28 years one of the two families have been leading this country. While I am very proud of the Bush efforts for this country, the Bush-Clinton rivalries have grown into hyper-partisan feuding. And the country is fed up with the hyper-partisanship.

Clinton is actually the most centrist of all the democrat candidates – which just shows how far to the left the party has drifted because she is no centrist. She would give any GOP candidate a run for the money of she was not Hillary Clinton. But the Clinton name is a drag in more ways than one. I think the country can go elsewhere for their leaders after 20 (or 28 depending on how you count) years of Clintush-Bushton. Only one of my kids has lived in an America without Bushton-Clintush – it is time for a change.

So Hillary winning in Iowa and New Hampshire could be a very good thing for the GOP. But sadly the GOP needs to do more to reach out to the centrists as well. Remember, to govern requires coalitions – we prefer to get involved in shaping policy, not have it dictated to us by a small vocal group who look down their noses at things like reasonable ‘compromise’.

Oh, and for the record I am not for Bloomberg’s little unity party idea. If you want to elect an impotent President that is the way to do it because no matter what you don’t have a party in Congress, you have both the minority AND the majority opposed to you – and upset you beat their candidates! No, an independent run is a waste at this time. But I will note that this movement is a creature of the hyper-partisans and their abuse of centrist. This unity party idea is there because the country is fed up with the hyper-partisans on the fringes of both parties. Which is why only centrists can win in 2008, we are staying out of the fringes!