Hillary Clinton is moving so quickly to the left that it’s hard to keep up. Her aides are telling the New York Times she wants to “topple” the One Percent, she’s pledging solidarity with union bosses over lunch meetings at Mario Batali restaurants in Midtown, she supports a constitutional amendment to suppress political speech, she’s down with a right to same-sex marriage, she’s ambivalent over the Keystone Pipeline and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, she’s calling for an end to the “era of mass incarceration,” she wants to go “further” than President Obama’s illegal executive amnesty. It’s called pandering, but the press is too frazzled or sympathetic to call her on it. There’s desperation to Clinton’s moves, an almost panicked energy, to close the gap between her and her party’s base. If Elizabeth Warren called for full Communism, Clinton would be at the barricades the next day.
Mitt Romney shocked the world—or rather, shocked the handful of people who obsessively follow politics—by toying with the idea of another presidential run. Then, on Friday, he proved a lot of eager pundits wrong by announcing that he wouldn’t run.
Romney’s decision to sit out 2016 is great news for Hillary Clinton, who is now the sole choice for voters in search of an old, out of touch, insanely wealthy, Wall Street-loving candidate with a history of failure.