Biden: Clinton Hard to Beat in 2008 Race

[truthpusher]

http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2005/02/27/ap/headlines/d88gvag80.txt

Sunday, February 27, 2005
-------------------------
Biden: Clinton Hard to Beat in 2008 Race
-------------------------
WASHINGTON - Sen. Joseph Biden says any Democrat who wants to run for president in 2008 should keep in mind these three words: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"I think she'd be incredibly difficult to beat," the Delaware Democrat said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I think she is the most difficult obstacle for anyone being the nominee."

(snip)

"She is likely to be the nominee," Biden said. "She'd be the toughest person and I think Hillary Clinton is able to be elected president of the United States."

Biden said he is thinking about running again, 20 years after his first failed bid for the White House because "there's a lot at stake."

complete story: http://www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2005/02/27/ap/headlines/d88gvag80.txt

[acmavm]

1. NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

.

[IndianaGreen]

43. I second your "NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

and Biden is such a neolib puke!

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

70. Please G-d, no Hillary. We can kiss any chances of the WH goodbye.

WTF?

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

157. ADIOS

[Lone Pawn]

143. Biden isn't "neoliberal."

Neoliberal is an actual word, meaning one who is completely free market.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

54. Erm, negatory.

[Kimber Scott]

92. YYYYYYEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!

She's already been vetted by the right. They can't dig up anymore skeletons and they've already played their hand with her. They are scared shitless of her because she's much smarter than they are.

For me, I would be very proud to have her as my President.

[King Coal]

135. A woman can't get elected.

That is the sorry truth.

[Kimber Scott]

162. That sounds very unprogressive of you.

Watch her do it.

[Bronco69]

2. Ole Xerox Joe needs to save his money, he doesn't stand a chance

If Hillary is the nominee, I'm behind her 100%

[bemildred]

3. Yeah, with Biden on her side, how could she lose? nt

[hippiechick]

4. The subconscious ad campaign begins ...

'You can't beat Hillary'
'Hillary's the only Dem with a chance'
'Hillary's got the support'

... and any truly PROGRESSIVE candidate who actually represents the
average working schmoe doesn't have a rat's chance against the machinery that is trying to pre-determine our nominee for us.

It's the same head game they played on us when they were forcing Kerry down our throats. Don't fall for it again, people ...

[imenja]

7. others will run in the primary

and it's up to us to volunteer for the more progressive candidates. No one thought Dean could be DNC chair either, but it happened.

[IndianaGreen]

44. They are trying to create the "inevitability" of Hillary

in order to discourage other candidates from running against her sorry prowar ass.

Don't listen to this shit. Let's encourage others to run.

[Gyre]

106. The question is who are "they"?

Many questions of politics are answered by the question "cui bono" or "who benefits"?

Seems to me to be the DLC and the REPUBES. DLC cause they get to pretend they're viable for another 4 years, and the Repubes because they could put up Francis the talking mule and even he'd kick her substantial ass.

The thing that's disgusting about this is that the DLC doesn't care if they win or not. They just need to justify their machine's existence one four-year period at a time. Not saying that they enjoy being losers, but winning isn't their primary goal.

Gyre

[inslee08]

133. Inevitability? You mean like...

you mean like the inevitability (said the MSM) of Dean's nomination?

[fugue]

8. FEAR NOT!

I won't fall for it again.

I don't think Hillary can win the ultimate race. For starters, she's a woman. The red states are not going to put a woman in the White House. I agree that this woman shouldn't be president, too, but the point is that they won't vote for her, for that reason if no other.

Therefore, we've got an excellent reason for refusing her, in addition to our being true progressives. I'm her constituent, and I positively loathe her. A complete DINO, in my opinion. I told her she never fails to live down to my expectations of her.

[CrispyQ]

12. I agree completely.

Although it saddens me to say this, I agree that this country is not ready for a woman president. And I also agree that more importantly, we need someone who will represent real progressive values, not republican-lite values.

BTW, has she responded to your correspondence regarding your expectations? I wrote to my senator (Salazar) regarding his poor performance in the one short month he's been in office & I don't expect to hear from him.

[Merlot]

59. Kiss the south good-by

and dream about tomorrow.

[Lorien]

10. Amen!

No more DLCers, no way, no how!

[stepnw1f]

11. Thank You! (nt)

[judy]

13. I'm with you hippiechick...

I do think the media nominated Kerry, just like I think they want to nominate Hillary.
I myself don't think much of Hillary, as I see her closer to the Republicans and with less heart than her husband.

Hillary is in my view (I'll be happy to be proven wrong, though) another one of these Democrats who are so into "compromise to win" that they don't really bring anything new to the table, and in the end, they lose.

That said, I do believe there was no way the Bushistas would ever have relinquished power in 2004 even if Kerry had been ahead by a landslide. But that, we'll never know...

[oasis]

17. "Compromise" can be a valuable tool in moving forward. (eom)

[judy]

26. You may be right oasis, in a world that has not yet accepted

the unacceptable.

But in my view right now, Bush & Co have pushed the limits of decency so far, that there is a point where one cannot compromise any more without being involved themselves in the harm done by these policies to the moral fabric of this country and the world.

I am thinking of Hillary's recent trip to Iraq, where from what I gather she never exited the Green Zone and proclaimed "guarded optimism". This shows either ignorance, (which I doubt, Hillary being a highly intelligent and informed woman) or willingness to accept the false reality peddled by Smirk & Co.

The latter is what scares me.

[blm]

41. Really? That wasn't the media pronouncing Kerry as dead for 6 months?

That wasn't the media who overstated Dean's support in Iowa?

You must not have been watching American media.

They understated Kerry's support on the ground for months to try and force him out by drying up his national fundraising.

Where the HECK do you get any evidence that the media pushed Kerry over Dean when not ONE news network even carried the Firefighters' endorsement of Kerry during the primary? As if, post 9-11, that emdorsement had no meaning.

I sure would LOVE to see all those positive articles and news segments that pushed Kerry during the months before the primary.

Please share them.

[renaissanceguy]

85. I'm sure you've heard the terms "electability" and "presidential"

tossed around on political talk shows... They kept saying Dean wasn't either of those, and Kerry was. But at the same time, nobody ever defined the parameters of those terms.

Either way, I see quotes like these about Hillary to be pushing her down our throats already.

[blm]

132. Using either adjective wasn't a LIE. Overstating ground support in Iowa

for Dean WAS a media lie. Understating support for Kerry WAS a media lie.

[judy]

94. Wasn't it the media, that invented "The Dean Scream"?

All I know is that one day Dean was the front runner, and I agree with you blm that his support in Iowa was overstated.
Then, next thing you know there is the "Dean scream", a media engineered non-event that seemed to bring him down...

That's what I saw. Now, you might have some info that I don't have. But Kerry was indeed the furthest candidate in my mind, way behind Dean and Clark (I myself voted for DK...).
Suddenly, after the so called "Dean scream", he's the front runner. I found that very strange.

[karynnj]

121. Kerry won Iowa before the Dean scream

It was after coming in third in Iowa (way below expectations) that there was the Dean sceam. Kerry was expected to have some momentum from the Iowa win. NH, I think gets much of its media out of Boston, so they probably had seen Kerry for years. The Iowa win and probably many MA people campaigning across the border obviously caused a lot of people to take a second look at Kerry.

I would guess there were many people like me who initially wanted Kerry or Dean. My biggest fear is that they could knock each other out as they were percieved as 2 NE liberals. (DK did not seem to have impressive enough credentials). Kerry impressed me more in the primary debates and as I read more about him I realized that there was more I admired in him than in any candidate I've ever had the chance to vote for - and my first vote was for McGovern.

I do think once Kerry won NH and Iowa, another candidate would have had to do incredibly well on Super Tuesday to beat Kerry. When Kerry did better than anyone then, you are correct the media jumped in saying Kerry would win.

[blm]

134. Reports from Iowa on the ground from Nov2003 were that Kerry was stronger

with the Dem electorate there than any media was reporting. He had the veterans and firefighters with him and he was doing town halls almost every day.

Kerry worked his butt off there and it's a shame when people are manipulated by the press into thinking that it was stolen from Dean.

The stupid NONstory of the manufactured Dean scream was just another way to keep Kerry's actual strengths hidden from the American people. The media USED Dean's speech to do that.

Instead of telling the American people about HOW Kerry earned the support of the veterans and firefighters and the greater percentage of college students and the average Democratic citizen, the media focused on their own silly blow up story. They were obscene to every candidate then, and very much so to Edwards, whose rise to 2nd was completely dwarfed by their scream fetish.

[Lone Pawn]

144. Dean scream happened after Iowa.

It was his speech after he came in third place after he was expected to win. That day he won Iowa and New Hampshire handily, and Dean came in third. And then yelled like a madman on CNN. And then Kerry, who had surged from fourth to first, now had won two of two, and was the leader.

[elizm]

65. Not only the media...

But the Repugs also want Hillary to be the nominee. I certainly hope the Dems won't be stupid enough to fall for this again.

[Somawas]

14. Word.

eom

[Robeson]

23. Ding, Ding, Ding. We have a winner....

...you are exactly right.

[KittyWampus]

30. Kerry Was Forced Down Our Throats? Seems Like Dean Was The One

getting all the press and accolades... up until Kerry managed to, you know, WIN A PRIMARY.

[Tanketra]

124. Iowa has a primary now?

When did this happen?

[blm]

39. Untrue. Media tried to KILL Kerry's campaign by OVERSTATING Dean's support

in Iowa.

Many of us who have been activist DEMS FOR DECADES looked forward to casting votes for John Kerry.

Anyone who truly cared about investigating and exposing government corruption stood PROUDLY by Kerry as the one who did more about it than any lawmaker in modern history.

[saracat]

47. Kerry wasn't forced down anyone's throat. As I recall, Dean was

the front runner and the media darling! Until he LOST.And he did LOSE before the "scream". Sheesh, even Karl Rove touted Dean, as did all the MSM who said Kerry was dead in the water, and then he , WON, and he continued to WIN. And he NEVER became a media darling. They generally didn't cover him. THe MSM ignored the Kerry Campaign. And that hurt us.

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

145. Yeah, like Bush won

The deal was rigged.

[saracat]

156. LOL. And the comparison to Bush is absurd.

[mtnester]

86. The subconscious tweaking has even made its way to the Zogby polls

it was one of the questions in the most recent poll I took.

[cosmicdot]

116. anyone from Iowa familiar with the primary anti-Dean push-polls ...

or with Republicans same-day registering as Democrats to vote against Dean ... that an on-the-ground-involved Iowan told me about?

the MSM-Noise Machine work in more than one 'medium'


me, I voted for DK ... I think ... it was on an ES&S machine ...

[AgadorSparticus]

120. you got that right!! i won't make that mistake again. i want a REAL

liberal who isn't trying to accomodate the "middle". enough is enough.

[adarling]

5. he bothers me

Ever since i watched Bill Maher with him on it and he was so anti gannon and didn't come out (oops) with the rest of the senators against it, i find him kinda weak. :boring: Hillary i think will be good, especially against condi rice if thats the case, that woman is a complete moron.

[Redneck Socialist]

6. It's sad when a good politician...

starts smoking crack. Neither Biden nor Clinton are going to get anywhere near the nomination much less the whitehouse.

[VegasWolf]

9. Three words for Biden, "Forget my vote!" n/t

[Somawas]

15. Three words for Hillary: "I'm going Green."

eom

[VegasWolf]

20. Me too! Voting for Hillary would be throwing away my vote anyway.n/t

[HockeyMom]

32. New Yorker

Personally, as someone who voted for Hillary, I would prefer she ran for a second Senate term. They are just chomping at the bit to have a REPUBLICAN win a NY Senate Seat. Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. No, I don't think they will run him in 08. Maybe the rest of the country doesn't know pre-9/11 Rudy, but you can be sure it will all ALL COME OUT. Just like Kerik. Plus unless Rudy has some kind of "rapture", the Fundies would quake in their boots if they ever heard his views on social issues. PRO GAY MARRIAGE? LOL Last poll I saw here, Hillary would even beat Rudy (this time too) in a Senate match up.

I agree. Don't run Hillary for President.

[Lena inRI]

80. "Four words for Hillary: Put country before self!"

[indypaul]

16. The NEXT election happens to be

in November 2006 and if we don't take back the House
there may not be an election in 2008. "As you go through
life, make this your goal. Keep your eye on the donut
not the hole."

[justy387]

18. yayyyyy!

Hillary for president.

You people are grossly out of touch. Read any account of the Clinton White House, All Too Human, Locked in the Cabinet, etc., they all say how Hillary was the White House's biggest liberal.

You must accept the fact that this country is more conservative than it is liberal. That's why we don't currently have the luxury of running candidates that lean to the left as much as they could run candidates that lean to the right.

Don't worry, the pendulum will swing back soon enough, and we will have a true liberal in the White House. Until then, Hillary is liberal enough to keep the base happy, and moderate enough to WIN!

[VegasWolf]

21. Yeah, right. Not. n/t

[justy387]

27. great argument!

:eyes:

[VegasWolf]

29. One its surface it was so patently untrue that I could not even begin

to conjure up a response that would even begin to do justice
to the stupidity of the argument that Hillary should be president.
I still don't have all day to attempt such a Herculean feat.

[justy387]

33. I love it how bitter democrats

use all their energy to attack succesful democratic candidates who win elections like Clinton, and others instead of attacking those who don't win like Dean or the evil Republicans.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VegasWolf]

98. You presume too much, you know what they say about assumptions!n/t

[Clark2008]

139. Not using any energy on her.

It's just that she cannot win the White House, so why put her up as the nominee?
I'm in a red state and would like the opportunity to turn it blue again - and Hillary isn't the candidate to do that. Sorry.

Clark/Warner '08 = landslide.

[stevedeshazer]

31. That's exactly the kind of logic that got us here in the first place

Screw moderate.

Swing the pendulum NOW. That'll be soon enough.

[Pepperbelly]

51. What do you base that assertion upon?

Just a "gut feeling" or what? Or do you have some reason to say that?

[saracat]

46. How dare you? I don't have to accept anything! And I certainly DON"T!

"You must accept the fact that this country is more conservative than it is liberal. That's why we don't currently have the luxury of running candidates that lean to the left as much as they could run candidates that lean to the right."

I don't accept the fact that this country is more conservative than it is liberal.There were 79 million people who were eligible to vote that didn't this last cycle and they would have voted had not the DLC manipulated the Kerry Campaign and tried to present him as less than the liberal he is.These are the people who craft image and talk out of both sides of their mouths. They haven't elected anyone since Clinton. Talk about people who are"divorced from reality", As Guckert says!
And you expect me to accept this thinking? I think not.

[Pepperbelly]

53. DLC?

Not that old saw again.

What do you base your assertion upon? That the DLC is what caused Kerry to lose?

[saracat]

68. If one knows anything about the DLC , it is not just an "old saw".

Even a preliminary investigation would indicate that the influence of their centrist philosophy on key members of the Kerry Campaign did, in fact, create the perception of a Kerry "loss". I say "perception" because many, including Christopher Hitchens of Vanity Fair, do not believe, based on the numbers, that Kerry lost. The idea of moving the party to the center is all "old news nineties " and is no longer applicable, caused the campaign,to paint Kerry as less of a liberal than he is. They have also allowed the word"liberal" to be demonized. In fact, Al From and his cohorts have done so themselves! This left the 79 million voters who were eligible to vote but didn't, with no choice as they perceived it.
Investigation has indicated that these voters would vote Democratic if they were not presented with what they perceive as "Republican lite."

[Pepperbelly]

75. you haven't yet nipped the flower ...

What exactly did that have to do with Kerry's loss?

[justy387]

84. You have to realize Pepper,

these guys need a scapegoat. And their scapegoat is the orginization that is willing to bring our party into the future.

[VegasWolf]

100. Repuke lite is not the future. n/t

[saracat]

122. That "scapegoat" is the organization of the past. They

are an anachronism. They haven't elected anyone in twelve years! They cost us the Congress in 1996and have been losing ever sine. Their philoshpy is to make our party so similar to the republicans the voter has no choice. They call it going to the center.Well gues what folks.We tried it .It doesn't work in the 21st Century. This isn't 1992. Forgetaboutit. We need to draw lines of distinction and Republican lite is NOT the way to go.

[saracat]

123. They advised him to move to the middle and look less liberal.

When voters have a choice, they vote Democratic. The DLC blurs the lines. Their advise was crap and they ought never to be allowed near another Presidential candidate. Their centrist philosphy is
losing us elections.

[Pepperbelly]

130. you keep saying that but ...

I am still uncertain about what makes you believe that. Members of the DLC were elected this last cycle. No doubt some candidates who did not belong to the DLC were elected. Why do you think the non-DLC is more efficacious?

[saracat]

148. They haven't elected a President since 1992. They were

useless in 1996 .Clinton was elected because he was Clinton and their advice cost us control of the house. People listened to these idiots. Liberals will be more effective than centrists. DLC Centrists offer NO choice. The voters are begging for a choice.We have 79 million eligible voters who didn't vote because they felt they didn't have a choice. Get it? There is no difference between the DLC and Republicans. As Truman said, "presented with a choice between a Republican and a Republican, voters will vote Republican every time"! Why vote for the carbon copy when you can get the "real" thing? Will Marshall,One of the godfathers of the DLC, is a member of PNAC, and if that doesn't tell you something, it is beyond hope.
That being said, there are members of the DLC in name only. Howard Dean is a former member of the DLC . Gore, who also quit , is a founding member. Kerry is a member in name only. I think he is due to resign. He is voting incorrectly, not according to policy. They weren't happy with him because of his bucking them about gay marriage. He refused to support the constitutional amendment after they had Clinton call him. Kerry is a liberal and they don't allow those. Read anything by Al From and you will see that is the case.

[Pepperbelly]

151. if they are as ...

powerless as you say, why are you concerned about them?

And what are you suggesting?

Do you have a problem with battling them in the intellectual arena of ideas and votes?

[saracat]

154. They aren't powerless within the Party echelons of power.

You don't think the people have any choice in determining the party philosophy do you? When is the last time anyone had a real vote on that? Have you ever tried to influence the party platform? Or written part of it? I have . It is very difficult . The ideas are pre formed.
I do think the people have made a step toward taking the Party back with actually forcing an election for Chair. Carville wasn't happy about that. He said we should have appointed one the way we usually do with a pro forma election. But the people forced a race. They wanted Dean, and got him. That is progress, but I think they will be surprised when they find Dean is not as liberal as perceived.
Dean is a former,(and possibly current DLCer)and appears to be moderating his stance to their expectations. That would be bad,IMHO. Nevertheless, The DLC faced their first defeat with the election of Dean. But they will probably compensate by having him tow the line.
As for battling them in the "intellectual arena of ideas and votes, yes, I do have a problem in that those votes and ideas are ant-Democratic. Joe Lieberman's support of privatization of Social Security is one DLC position that comes to mind. We shouldn't have to battle our own members in defense of the defining issues of our party. If they cannot support the core issues of the Democratic Party, and want us to throw them overboard in a misbegotten and doomed effort to secure votes, they shouldn't be Democrats.

[Pepperbelly]

160. I think you're putting words in Joementum's mouth on that one.

I have not seen him come out in support of piratization. It wouldn't surprise me but still, I have not yet seen that.

[saracat]

161. He is in negotiations to do so. It has been reported on Capitol Hill.

It is common knowledge he is the weak link, and he has not denied it. BTW as for "piratization" He might be for that too? Who knows? Sorry, I couldn't resist. The typo was too funny!:)

[Pepperbelly]

163. it was quite intentional.

Joementum had rendered a pretty strong defense for SS over the last few years. I would be surprised if he flipped. I think it would be his death knell politically to the point that incumbency would be irrelevant.

The use of piratization was very, very intentional, thank you.

[saracat]

165. Ah1 Yes. That Great Liberal Lieberman, who votes continually

with the repukes. I reacall his supporting Gonzales too. Sure .We can count on him. BTW, did you know the repukes, I just got a copy of their flyer from the our state GOP chair that we intercepted, and they call this "presercing Social Security" They are asking people to sign a petition to "preserve " Social Security. Maybe that is what Joe means too!

[justy387]

83. Read the exit poll:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

VOTE BY IDEOLOGY BUSH
KERRY NADER
TOTAL 2004 2000 2004 2004

Liberal (21%) 13% +0 85% 1%

Moderate (45%) 45% +1 54% 0%

Conservative (34%) 84% +3 15% 0%


Only 21% of the country is liberal while 34% is conservative. 45% is moderate.

It's a fact. Our country is more right than we are left. Unless, the Democratic Party realizes this, we will have Republicans in office forever.

[VegasWolf]

101. So we move right??? What outlaw abortion? Mandatory pREyer??n/t

[justy387]

118. Nope to both of those.

The sure way to outlaw abortion and make praying mandatory is to give up on the Democrats and vote 3rd party, so that we keep on having RW politicians that allow RW justices on the supreme court.

We have to moderate our view on abortion. "Legal but rare" Stop voting down legislation like Laci's Law. Moderate our views on gun control. Many rural voters have this ridiculous but compeling fear that liberals will take their guns away.

We need to run on issues that we can all agree on: Stem Cell Research, Environmental Protection, Tax-breaks for College, etc., etc. and not the issues that divide us!!

[wmills551]

131. So True!!

What a great post!

[justy387]

141. thanks! nt

[Clark2008]

150. If this is the case, why do you want to run a moderate whom everyone

thinks is an ultra-liberal.
Seriously, Hillary's tainted as a liberal among moderates (I know, I am one). She will not make any headway in the red states and we need to do that. It's not good enough to keep the status quo.
Why not run a liberal who appears moderate?

[cosmicdot]

115. is this poll one to be believed?

I don't know which ones to believe.

personally, I've tired of the label game ... labels seem to get in the way of smart policy: doing what will help our Ship of State, Society and People vs. the Radical Republican Corporate Fundamentalist agenda-in-play ... they don't compromise, so there really isn't any centrist/moderate position without agreeing with them imo.

I'm looking for the leader who will choose people over corporate america.

Anyone voting for tort reform, the bankruptcy help out the banks reform bill, the oil & profit wars, class action corporate fairness bills, etc., aren't the economic populists this country need to fight and fix this mess.

[truthpusher]

164. All that means is a lot of Democrats call themselves moderates. n/t

[hezekkia]

90. riiiiight.

"There were 79 million people who were eligible to vote that didn't this last cycle and they would have voted had not the DLC manipulated the Kerry Campaign and tried to present him as less than the liberal he is."

That is a hilariously absurd (and ENTIRELY unsubstantiated) claim. Where exactly is your proof that Democrats stayed home because of DLC manipulation? I don't know of many libs who stayed home because Kerry was too conservative. I know this liberal voted-- as did anyone else who was pissed off at the state of this country.

[dameocrat]

97. She voted for the war, and the bankrupcy bill

but she is percieved as liberal. She is another Kerry lets face it. It awful to have a candidate that is perceived as a liberal that runs away from liberalism. No more wishy washy candidates that sucks.

[depakid]

108. Voted for the bankruptcy bill despite the fact that

her husband veto'd it....

[Zhade]

158. No thanks. I will not vote for her.

NT!

[struggle4progress]

19. No more political dynasties, please. eom

[DemNoir]

22. This is the best way to kill off any candidate

Declare them the winner 4 years out.

[VegasWolf]

24. Okay, Jeb Bush for Pretzeldent. n/t

[Laurab]

109. Whew

thanks, vegaswolf!

[sellitman]

25. I've got 3 reasons why Hillary has NO CHANCE.

1)Republican (2)Voting (3) Machines

[VegasWolf]

28. LOL! Two more words "Die" "Bold" n/t

[bearfan454]

57. Ding Ding Ding Ding

Exactly right. We could run Jesus Christ and still lose with the electronic vote stealing.

[cosmicdot]

114. sellitman! word!

where have I been?!?

:hi:

[sellitman]

117. Hey Cosmic!!!!!

Long time no see. Great to see a familiar face among the faithful. I am getting real comfortable here on DU. It takes some getting use to but the quality is very evident. What have you been up to?

Kevin

[cosmicdot]

119. glad you saw my 'hi'

I'm a slow-poke anymore ... bu$hwhackingburnout ... remembering the days of yahoo club hopping ... 5 years later ... I just can't do it anymore ... it's like we're under a full-court press on all levels.

I maintain the yahoo corporate sleuth site (link is in my profile); and, hang here with the occasional visit to the col.'s bushwhacker2 group ... and, basically, trying to survive the madness and this nightmare.

really good to see ya ... catch you in other threads

edit: spelling

[Seabiscuit]

34. Oh, shut up, Biden! You sound like Robert Novak, you idiot!!!

[Massachusetts]

35. Honestly

What Dem wants to inherit the Social and Financial mess that georgie boy and company will leave behind.

History always repeats...Rethugs rape and pillage with the consent of the middle class...Middle class cries uncle, and Dems end up being hired to clean up the mess making the difficult choices necessary to right the "ship" again. Middle class cries uncle again at the difficult choices the Dem leaders have made to salvage what was left behind..Rethugs hired again to rape and pillage one more time.


:wtf:

[arikara]

36. You said it...

we have exactly the same thing happening here with BC provincial politics. The progressives in the left have to keep fighting to drag the party out of the center with those holding power kicking and screaming cause now that they're in they want to play with the big boys.

[high density]

37. So I take it Joe likes Republican presidents?

All the Dems in the Hillary 08 war wagons need to wake the hell up.

[Sean Reynolds]

38. Maybe...but she'll be VERY easy to beat in the generals.

Run Clinton and you're going to have at least 12 years of Republican domination in the White House.

[saltpoint]

40. If Biden wound up our nominee he'd have my vote.

If he decides officially to run, he should probably skip the Iowa caucuses and put his early money into New Hampshire, where he could make things interesting.

Nationwide I think he might have more appeal than Hillary Clinton but less than John Edwards, Wesley Clark, and Evan Bayh. Two of those three -- Edwards and Bayh -- are going to place first and second in Iowa.

[stray cat]

42. In an election I would vote for Clinton or Biden

I like both of them better than Lott, Frist, Jeb, Santorem, Ginrich and the likes. Anyone who thinks there is no difference deserves a radical republican. I will be picky in the primaries but I will likely get behind most any democrat nominee.

[truthpusher]

45. How about a Clinton Biden ticket?

I have no opinion one way or the other, but these two look pretty good together. Since the whole female president thing would be new, I bet a lot of people would get a subconscious impression that these two are a couple. On of the Kerry/Edwards problems was that they did not come across as an undeniable team. Clinton and Biden would give of a 'couple' impression implying a team bond. They are appealing individually as well. Maybe?

[IndianaGreen]

49. For which party? The Compassionate Imperialist Party?

I have no opinion one way or the other, but these two look pretty good together.

So did Hitler and Mussolini, and Bush and Condi. It proves nothing!

[truthpusher]

61. Don't forget Ben and Jennifer! nt

[Doremus]

50. Biden is irresponsible to even TALK about running ANYONE...

who isn't the absolute best candidate possible.

There will be a time when the nation's ready for a female president -- but now isn't the time to push this. There is simply too much at stake and the nation too fractured to add yet ANOTHER divisive issue, women's rights, to the long list of contentious issues that already divides us.



And Biden can bite me. "Yes Condi lied, but I'm going to vote for her anyway." Ass-kissing puke.

[bearfan454]

52. Hillary CANNOT win

Plain and simple. The repukes HATE the Clintons. The red states will not elect a woman president. Besides that, what makes anybody think they won't steal it electronically again ?

[Pepperbelly]

55. Repukes would never cross over anyway ...

so that really doesn't matter much.

[alfredo]

64. The thing is, Hillary is polling well with Republicans in NY.

She has always done well with women and men who are not threatened by smart, powerful women.

She has shown that she can handle any shit thrown at her.

I think we underestimated her when she ran for the Senate. Who thought she would win?


Not sure about how good a president she will make. But she's a lot better than anything the Pukes have.

I can see she is working to undermine the moral issues "owned" by Republicans. That is what Bill C did. It worked for us and pissed off the Pukes.

I'm a Clarkie at heart, but if Hillary gets the nod, I will be out walking precincts, tabling, and manning the phone banks.

[juajen]

72. Same here

I love Clark and hope he runs. Do you think he would run against Hillary. He seems to really like the Clintons. I have a lot of respect and love for Hillary Clinton. I think she is an astute politician. I am, however, very discouraged over dems having to rescue the pugs again. This is a cycle that needs to be broken. If only.

[alfredo]

82. Clark seems to be keeping his name out there, but I don't

think he could compete with the Hillary machine. She could actually win the whole thing.

Of course they will bring out the Swift Boat Moms to smear her.

I would love to see Clark involved in one capacity or other. He would be a great SoS, Def Sec, Veep, or President.

[KurtNYC]

136. Let her run on the GOP ticket then

Giuliani imploded during his senate campaign. The more they saw of him upstate, the less they liked him. NYC already knew the truth about Rudy.

Nationwide is a very different story. The RW uses gays and Hillary Clinton to raise their grassroots money. Nothing seems to send RWers to their checkbooks faster than gays and Hillary Clinton. Biden would do well to get a commission deal with them before he parrots this meme again.

[alfredo]

153. Don't judge her on

on her positioning on issues at this stage of the game. It's a chess game going on.

[Unforgiven]

56. Repeat after me

Re: Alberto Gonzales

You know, I like you, You're the real deal.

yea. Thanks Joe.

Yechhh!

[Donailin]

67. You know, at this point

I'll take her. One thing can be said about her, she's smart as all get out, she's careful, judicious and calculating. However, she's married to Bill and I can't believe that her policies would be much different than his, and I found Bill's quite agreeable. I will wager that by the end of shrubs second term kermit the frog could run on the dem ticket and get elected.

[Laurab]

110. I think you're right about the end of shrub's second term

if he lasts through the whole term. Long as the voting machines are working correctly, Kermit could win, or even my dog - she's a dem.

That being said, I still think Hillary makes a good senator, and should remain one for a few more years.

[Pepperbelly]

58. If she runs and if she wins the nomination, she will be the nominee.

That's the way it works. People pissing and moaning on a message board do not get to trump the entire primary process. If you don't want her, vote for someone else, support someone else, whatever.

All this ultimatum talk is childish bullshit. What don't you just post that you're going to hold your breath until you get your way?

[lovuian]

60. All Hillary need is a endorsement from Lieberman and it

would make it complete!!!

NO!!!

[98geoduck]

62. I disagree, time for corporatists to take a back seat.

I personally, have had enough of the Dynasties that have run the country for the last 3+ decades. It's been all about pro corporatism for far too long. Our infrastructure, education, moral thread and livelihoods have gone down the shitter, along with doing little to better the environment. Basically, the politicians and businesses in this country have sucked the blood of our working class for far too long, and I can't see putting another Clinton in the Whorehouse would make any significant difference. Think, no longer a guarantee of retirement, overworked and underpaid, huge populace debt, lack of health-care, mass national and international pollution. For all of you that were giddy while Bill was in office making a fortune on overvalued tech stocks, a fiasco well worth any Republican's wet dream, there were a lot of us that didn't have trust funds, or a high paying salary to rake it all in during your high-life period. I was attending college, acquiring more debt, then working as an intern for near minimum wage. I'll remember the Clinton era as the underpaid or unpaid Intern period( with the exception of Monica) Yeah, Clinton was good for some, but the majority of us just continued to get screwed. This country has been flipped on it's head and no president, since Kennedy has done very much to stop it. So now we're here, lousy health care, no retirement, little vacation benefits, housing costs that are bankrupting the middle class, an environment that contains no clean water, cancer rates on the rise, an ill educated populace, and you want more of the same?
I think Ani Difranco said it best "take away our Playstations and we are a third world nation". 20 years of Clinton and Bush are enough for me. Think outside the box.

[Mabel Dodge]

63. It's never going to be a good time to run a woman..

There's always going to be some argument and something always wrong with the most likely woman to run. I say to hell with all the naysayers, Hillary has my vote. She smart, tough and knows how to play the game. Important qualities now, especially in this political climate. Go kick ass Hillary!

[juajen]

79. Yep, I'm with you. It's her time.

Run, Hillary, run.

[wisteria]

66. No to Hillary in 2008!

I just don't think she can win over a majority of Americans. If she is likely to be the nominee and tough to beat,why would Biden consider even running? He wants to lose to her? Also, as far as John Kerry being pushed by the media, I have to strongly disagree with that opinion. It was all Dean,Dean,Dean before the primaries.I barely heard anything about John Kerry.

[Mabel Dodge]

69. It's going to be dicey no matter what woman runs.

Do you think women should roll over for the sake of the cause? I'm one feminist who's not going there. Hillary is tough enough to start the ball rolling.

[wisteria]

73. I want to see a democrat win the next election

and I don't think Hillary is the one to take us there. It's not a male or female thing with me. She's still young, perhaps, after we gain ground and recover from all of our losses she may be more acceptable to me. I just don't think we can afford to take too many risks in the 2008 election and I consider Hillary to be a major risk.

[sffreeways]

71. Recent polls

have her ahead of any potential republican contender by 61%

There is alot of thoughtless sexism here when it comes to Mrs. Clinton.

She is a valid candidate, certainly as valid as John Kerry was. She's a better politcian than he that's for sure. Personally she is way too centrist for my taste but I would definately give her my vote should she become the next candidate.

It's time for a woman

[phylny]

74. We know how reliable polls are...

just look at where they got John Kerry! ;)

[Laurab]

112. Um - I think it was Die-bold that got John Kerry n/t

[phylny]

129. that was my point - did you see the winking smily face? n/t

[Laurab]

140. Well no, but ty for pointing it out

it was late, and I was tired! :silly:

[wisteria]

76. I've seen only two recent polls

and yes she is ahead in these polls, but these things mean nothing at this point. The reality of her running is a long way off. Watch how the polls change when people are actually faced with this possibility. Also, I strongly disagree with your comments about John Kerry. He has run in several more campaigns then Hillary has. She has exactly one under her belt. I also consider him to be an excellent politician.

[Blasphemer]

77. I can't underestimate Hillary

and I don't buy the "she can't win" line of thinking. The American public is unpredictable but they do like familiarity and they like people who can create an "aura" (even a phony one like Dubya)... with 4 more years of Bush and his lunatic agenda, I think the country will be ready to go back to the well with the Clintons. Not as liberal as a politician (though very liberal privately) as I would like but I know I can trust her with the Supreme Court noms. I'm more worried about the Democratic party not properly addresses voter fraud than I'm worried about Hillary as the nominee.

[mmonk]

78. No, she won't be hard to beat

Repubs will paint her as a liberal, Dems a saviour, but for many voters in the democratic primary, she is a democan or republicrat.

[Juan Martinez]

81. Unsure

She used to be a Republican, before switching sides in college thorugh the help of her professor. I'm not sure whether or not I would vote for her just yet, but I have a feeling if she did run, she'd win.

[ScreamingMeemie]

88. Half the Dems. I view her as a has been sellout...sadly.

:(

[ScreamingMeemie]

87. I think I'd like some of what he's on.

:eyes: Half of Dems don't care for her. It would be very hard to talk many shaky Dems into not bolting for the door...and a third party.

[LiberallyInclined]

91. Clinton/Biden in 2008?

it's starting to look like that may be the ticket that they want to foist upon next time around...

:puke:

and if so, colour me GREEN...and remember that you heard it here first.

I think we need to look OUTSIDE the Senate for our candidate next time...a governor, ex-governor, or even a former military man-
Anything but a senator(nor former senators either, mr. edwards)

[Robeson]

95. I'm with you...

[Mabel Dodge]

93. This is a job for SUPER LIBERAL

More powerful than a Republican with a key to the voting machines...
Faster than a neo-con with a dirty little secret to hide...
Able to leap the obstacles of main stream media with a single bound..
Look up on the hill...IT'S SUPER LIBERAL

Sorry folks...last time I looked there is no perfect politician.

Hillary is tough and smart, I'm betting the toughest and smartest we've got.

Go Hillary...Kick some evil Repub ass!

[Enraged_Ape]

96. The more the whore media and skin jobs like Biden support Hillary '08

the more I realize it's a terrible idea, and that they desperately WANT us to believe it.

Yes, it's gotten that bad. Whatever the press says re: politics, the opposite has to be true.

[Doremus]

99. Oh yeah, Run Hillary

Right now is the PERFECT time to prove the electorate is ready --for the first time in history-- to invite a woman into the WH, and not just to look pretty.

I mean, the country isn't fractured at all and there really are no more important issues right now.

Of course, the fact that favorable likeability polls do -not- translate into votes is only a minor matter. After all, what difference does it make if we lose? It's only another 4 years of repuke control.

The important thing is that we stood on principle.

:puke:

[Mabel Dodge]

102. I've lived a long time...

and I can tell you from experience there is never a good time. There is always some damn problem or excuse. I personally don't want to keep waiting the rest of my life for "that perfect time".

Thank god that the suffragettes didn't wait for a perfect time to pursue the right to vote for women.

[Doremus]

105. I'm not suggesting waiting for the "perfect" time.

Just one where the stakes aren't quite as high.

Losing is not an option this time, and Hillary is a long shot of the highest order. She has more baggage than Greyhound for cripe's sakes.

Let her run when the worst we can end up with is McCain or Ahnold. There's not much difference anyway.

[Mabel Dodge]

113. You're welcome to your opinion...

but when aren't the stakes going to be high? Unfortunately there is always some wolf at the door. I don't want to wait for that magic moment when everything is just right...I'll never see it.

Frankly it's as good as it gets. Right now we have someone highly qualified to do the job and tough enough to take the shit she is going to be forced to eat.

[oasis]

126. Folks love to talk about Hillary's "baggage"but fail to explain what they

mean by it. I've asked this question of a half dozen or so DUers and I have yet to receive a concrete answer.

So here goes: What baggage?

[PhuLoi]

137. How about this two-suit samsanite? Hillary is a member of

Friends of India, a group of highly placed politicos that protect and further the outsourcing of jobs to India.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/592231.cms

Is it not true that she was a hired gun for Wal Mart? A steamer trunk in my opinion.

[oasis]

152. Hillary demonstrates her ability to work in a bi-partisan manner on

international affairs. That's a plus.

Your interpretation of the link is misleading.

[rfkrfk]

103. What are Joe's other predictions?

I want to know...the future.

[PhuLoi]

138. Swami Joe predicts: When Bush throws his next "Thanks for all

your help" La Cosa Nostra style liplock, a la Joe Liberman, on Hillary, he'll slip her the tongue.

[genieroze]

104. Oh, hell NO!!!!!!!!!!!! eom

[depakid]

107. What's it going to take to get rid of that Biden cancer

He's the media whores' little darling- and probably the most pernicious influence on the Democratic party today. Obviously the man's too arrogant to see it- and probably too sociopathic to care.

Someone's probably going to have to lateral hire the guy, because Delaware's not going dump him- as they should have after the plagarism incident came to light years ago....

[Emops]

111. I don’t like Hillary,

but if she’s the nominee (I know, I know) I’ll reluctantly vote for her. However, she’s not going to get nominated.

Having Biden on the ticket would make me vote for a Hagel or a McCain, or skip voting for President altogether. Better a real Republican than a fake one.

I would love to see Wes Clark, Bill Richardson, or even John Edwards on the ticket. Also, I think the time is right for Al Gore (the ultimate “I Told You So” candidate).

[Sugarbleus]

125. Noooooooooooooooo

Can't the Dems pick out somebody we can all pretty much get on board with??????????? What is WRONG with this party!!??

Hillary is waaaaaaaaaaay too stuffy and uppity. She doesn't give a damn about anyone "beneath" her unless they are a child....

She's waaaaaaaaaaay too self righteous and out of touch with everyday citizens. She's intelligent, yes, but we need COMPASSION to go with that. We need WISDOM and ETHICS to go with that. She's an automaton.

Noooooooooooooooo no no no no no no no no :scared:

[RedTail Wolf]

127. I want Joe to run

Joe Biden is a GREAT Democrat in my opinion. I support him. Hillary is not electable, imho, and we can't loose again!


RedTail Wolf

[Zhade]

159. I'd vote for CLINTON over Biden.

At least she hasn't endorsed any PNAC views in writing!

[xxqqqzme]

128. no, no, no, no, no, no,

10,000X NO. We need a progressibve not a stuck in the mud, backward sighted DLCer. Dear god......pleae NO!

[jswordy]

142. Hillary is it? THEN WE LOSE!

I won't vote for her...not because she's a woman, but because of her neo-Republican stances.

Our party needs to face it, the Clintons were great in their time (I supported them both then), but they are old-line now. We need to look ahead, not backward.

Frankly, though, between us...I'm not worried cuz I think the next nom will be someone almost unknown at the present time, and NOT any of the "usual suspects."

Uh, I also would ask why Biden...who it is commonly known wants to run...would say such a thing? There HAS to be something in it for him...or at least he thinks there's an angle in it for him...

[Chicago Democrat]

146. Biden = Kiss of Death

Joe, you are a weeney

[Khaotic]

147. She Won't Get The Nod From Iowa

Speaking from the battleground state of Iowa, and the area where Kerry got his traction, Davenport, Iowa. I can be certain that Hillary won't get my vote in the Democratic Caucus. No Iowa, no chance. She'll go down as fast as Dick Gephardt did.

Hillary can't win and won't win.

Trying to get her elected would be about as successful as trying to redefine people's perceptions about what a liberal is.

Newt defined it ... redefining it will take a long time.

They've defined Hillary. They may have been scared of her in the past, but they've already layed the ground work to tear her apart.

They don't have to start at ground zero with her. She brings with her all the negative luggage from Bill, as well as all the tinfoil hat rantings (as they were defined by the right) in regard to how the right framed her husband.

She made a fool of herself and the neocons would love nothing more than to sink their teeth back into a Clinton.

I still say that the 22nd Amendment will be revoked to open up the possibility of a Bush/Schwarzenegger vs Clinton/Bayh battle.

Actually I don't think Hillary or Bill will go for it in '08 regardless of the circumstances.

My prediction: Bush/Schwarzenegger vs. Bayh/Granholm

Schwarzenegger and Granholm will be able to run on the undercard after Congress amends the Constitution so foreign born citizen's can run for president.

Regardless, Bush will run again in '08 after the 22nd Amendment is scrapped.

Wait and watch.

[Roland99]

149. Give me a BREAK! GOP-wannabe Hillary won't get any serious support

[Zhade]

155. "I think Hillary Clinton is able to be elected president"

Not with my vote.