If it came down to Hillary and Barbara Boxer who would you endorse?

[Imagevision]

Hillary is playing the politics game to the "T" while Boxer lets her opinions/feelings be well known.
WHO? would you back??

[FreedomAngel82]

1. Boxer

I have more faith in her personally. :loveya:

[lynettebro440]

17. Boxer

Not even a question.

[SCDem]

2. Boxer without a doubt

But we are talking Hypotheticals and I don't think it would ever happen especially in '08.

[libnnc]

3. Barbara Boxer speaks for me. n/t

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

4. BOXER, no fucking question. n/t

[bettyellen]

11. good fucking answer!

:hi:
:loveya:

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

26. thanks ms. betty!

:hug::loveya:

[RubyDuby in GA]

5. BARBARA! BARBARA! BARBARA!

Screw Hillary. I'm sick to death of her kowtowing to the damn rightwingers.

[bettyellen]

6. Boxer

buy a star, make all the polls you want!

[AllyCat]

7. Boxer--not DLC and one who has actually fought for us this year

n/t

[Vincardog]

8. Boxer no doubt

[paparush]

9. Boxer in a Heartbeat n/t

[rox63]

10. Boxer

There's just something I don't fully trust about Hillary. :shrug:

[darkism]

12. Boxer. Hillary is a centrist shrew and far too divisive to win. n/t

[flakey_foont]

13. Boxer

[helderheid]

14. are you fucking kidding me?

BOXER

[SaveElmer]

15. Hillary - Clintons are winners

As much as I appreciate Barbara Boxer...I do not think she could win.

[depakid]

48. Yeah- but we end up losers

The Clintons have proven time and again that they'll sell out progresive priciples (or even downright sensible policy) for political power and personal aggrandizement.

It's sort of a moot issue, though- neither one of them could win.

[SaveElmer]

52. Oh please...no purity tests!

The Clinton's are with us 95% of the time. They are great politicians. Do you seriously think we would be in the shit hole we are in in Iraq if Bill or Hillary Clinton were in office? Do you think that ANWR, and the Endangered Species Act would be under any kind of threat? Do you think they would be trying to gut Social Security?

Do you think that James Dobson and Jerry Falwell would be dictating social policy? Do you think that Justice Depratment thugs would be arresting cancer patients for using medical marijuana?

Do you think Bill of Hillary Clinton would be nominating right wing fanatics to the federal bench?

Time to get some perspective please. Bill Clinton has been the most successful and effective Democratic politician in 20 years, and there is every reason to believe Hillary is no less competent.

[depakid]

64. Spare me the cliches

and look at the actual policies- and maybe do a little analysis.

Try taking a look at what Clinton did to the FCC- or the FDA- or maybe NAFTA and the WTO- to name but a few.

The man (and his wife) are corporate panderers of the first order- and do so even when it's likely to come back to hurt us, haunt them and devistate the party- the Telecommunications act (and the failure to restore the fairness doctrine) being two cases in point.

The man utterly FAILED to wield executive power in a positive way at the federal agencies- even though it was totally under his power to do so.

[SaveElmer]

66. Spare me the naivete...

What you want is the perfect Democrat, one that will never dissapoint you and will never have to compromise...there is no such thing. Bill Clinton had a RW COngress 6 out of the 8 years he was in office. What he accomplished during that time was amazing given the constraints on him. Politicians do not live in a vacum...and if they act like they do, we end up with people like George Bush.

[depakid]

71. I think a mirror would be useful

It's the sell outs and failure to stand up for progresive principles that has caused the Democratic party to lose OVER AND OVER for the past 10+ years.

And people like the Clinton's (and their corporate allies at the DLC) are a major league part of that.

How much more evidence do you need? How many more election will we have to lose?

Methinks you might have a look in said mirror before you accuse others of naivete....

<on edit- a Republicn Congress has absolutely nothing to do with Clinton's profound regulatory failures- the far right didn't have a veto proof majority- but with a guy like Clinton- they didn't need one.>

[SaveElmer]

75. Really...

In the last 20 years who has been our most successfull politician? It is Bill Clinton, the only Democrat to win the WHite House diring the time of which you speak. Are you seriously using Bill Clinton as an example of Democratic futility?

What great President can you name that did not have to compromise? WHat great President did not have to sacrifice some principles for the greater good?

You can't name any because there are none. This is how our system works. To say that Bill Clinton abandonded our progressive principles is just silly. He retreated where he had to, and in the process advanced most of what we believe.

[depakid]

80. Cross posted on edit

You miss the point entirely. I don't think you understand how the constitutional process works- nor do I think you grasp the nature of the DLC's corporate connections.

Administrative agencies (as you can see from today's Supreme Court decisions) operate damn near independently of Congress- they can basically make law- and adjudicate like court. For Congress to overturn a properly enacted administrative decision requires a veto in both houses.

Clinton failed to use the process effectively or even competently - and what's worse- he placed Republicans (like Michael Powell, for example) in key roles!

His blatant failures at the SEC had a influence on the market crash and the subsequent economic downturn. It was HIS FERC- and NOT Bush's that allowed ENRON and others to create the phoney "energy crisis."

That's not "compromise," that's corruption!

As far as being "popular," well, if you look at either of the Bush's numbers- there were times that they were "more popular" than Clinton, too. Hell, you could name dozens of more "popular" politicians.

This isn't rocket science here- sound public poliy comes easy to a guy like Clinton. He simply chose to do the wrong things- for reasons well know on K-Street- and it had a profound and lasting efect on the Democratic party- which because of it all- is now essentially irrelevant.

[SaveElmer]

101. Documentation please...

You make some pretty serious charges that even the right wing hate mongers have not made...back them up...links please.

Blatant failures? What failures? Exactly, specifically what did Clinton do with regard to the SEC that caused the crash? And back this up with documentation.

I would also like you to provide specifics on Clintons nefarious K street connections, and proof that his overriding interest was his own power.

[depakid]

112. Just look at the timelines

When was all of the fraudulent accounting going on?

It was before Bush came to office.... Clinton appointed the SEC chairman- did he not? (and as Chief executive- one would like to think he had the power to order the agencies under his control to either:

a) draft regulations akin to some of the things in Sarbanes-Oxley that could have prevented the widespread fraud we saw (do you really want me to go into securities regs? I can, if you want), b) aggressively bring enforcement actions under existing laws & regs (like §§ 10b5 & 6, for example),
c) used the FTC's power, where appropriate.

Not to digress, but it would also have been nice if the power of the Presidency had been used in support of Glass-Steagall, rather than to de-regulate an "overly exuberant" set of sectors, while (what he- as smart guy damn well knew) was a big mess waiting to happen.

As to FERC- the record is again compelling when reviewed as a time series of events. Manipulation of energy markets had been going on for quite some time during his administration- which likely emboldened the Enrons & Dynergies of the world. I could could cite a ton of stuff on that but for the sake of brevity and clarity- here's a quick one two punch:

http://www.polstate.com/archives/002262.html

http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/jphuck/Book21Ch.22.html

The reason why the far right doesn't bring this up- of course- is because they do the same damn things! and they're worse- to some extent. Kinda like an alley way rapist is worse than a date rapist...

As to K Street, well, I leave that to your own research.

[SaveElmer]

121. You provide evidence of problems...

No evidence of corruption on Clinton's part, or that Clinton was aware or encouraged the problems with FERC.

The only Clinton involvement mentioned in these articles is Clinton's signing of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, pushed through by Gramm that deregulated energy futures trading. Obviously a mistake, but hardly evidence of corruption.

I have not argued that Clinton was a perfect President...no President is perfect. And no candidate we support, no matter who they are, is going to be perfect. I could easily go down the list of our greatest Presidents and cite the one or two horrid mistakes they made. This does not take away from the totality of their Presidency.

[Imagevision]

120. If Clinton wasn't busy with BJ's perhaps the Pentagon would have

taken him more serious when he decided to let some missles rip into Iraq while everyone accused him of playing the wag the dog scenario.

Clinton had his chance to respond against OBL with the Cole bombong and blew it big time, even he admitted to that."I could have done more"

[antigone382]

89. I'm really not so sure that Hillary would win either.

I don't think Hillary will have the same appeal that her husband did; nothing against her, but the right has just spent way too much time trampling her. She's too easy to target. It really worries me that the dems seem to be putting all our eggs in one basket for '08.

Quite honestly I don't think we could win with Boxer either. For better or for worse, people generally like to vote for more moderate candidates. Whether we like it or not, we have to find someone who can play in red states, without compromising our core principles, in order to win. Now, that would seem to put Clinton in a better position, since we know that she is a moderate dem. However, the problem is that, while Boxer really is a liberal, Clinton is constantly portrayed as one; it doesn't matter what she says or does, she's an easy target, and I just don't think she can overcome more than a decade of right wing smears.

We do have possible candidates who can gain traction in a few red states while still representing our beliefs, but this thread isn't about them. If it was a choice between Boxer and Clinton, as stated in the OP, I would have to endorse Boxer. I have nothing against Clinton, but Boxer's words and actions are more in line with my own beliefs.

[goclark]

Hillary but it would be hard cause I love Boxer

[oasis]

16. Hillary won't spoil her chances by turning off moderate voters. Boxer

can play to the left.

Hillary has the best chance of winning the presidency.

BTW, politicians do play politics.

[AllyCat]

23. One of the many reasons I would vote for Boxer

Tired of politics. I want someone who is a people's candidate. Unrealistic? Probably, but I want to be able to sleep at night.

[oasis]

32. How much sleep will you get when Boxer endorses Hillary for president? I

guess Barbara will be viewed as just another slimy politician. :shrug:

[spuddonna]

18. Boxer!! Al the way!! n/t

[woodsprite]

19. Boxer! She can be trusted to make decisions to support the average Amer.

[mondo joe]

20. Hillary because I think she'd more likely win, though I don't think

either would stand a good chance.

[peacetalksforall]

21. BOXER BOXER BOXER

And I am/was a grand defender of Hillary.

Do I sound confused. For nearly fifteen years I've been praising her, defending her, pushing her.

Now, I'm just confused about her.

I'm not confused about Boxer.

[fooj]

22. Boxer in a heartbeat!

peace.

[lynettebro440]

Boxer

No question about it.

[Roland99]

24. Boxer! F the DLC!

[MN ChimpH8R]

25. Boxer - in a heartbeat, n/t

[ComerPerro]

27. The first female president will be Republican

Because, they will get the sexist and bigot votes by default, on their "toughguy" image (and through their dealings with the religious right).

They only have to pander to people with Democratic tendancies, people who might like to see a woman in the White House.

Meanwhile, any female Democrat who runs for President will be roasted alive by the right wing. All we will hear is how in these times we can't have a woman in charge, how we need a tough male, etc...

[quinnox]

28. Hillary C.

Boxer wouldn't be able to get elected, HRC could win and she is a much more formidable politician in that she is a tough SOB

[MadisonProgressive]

29. I'd support Boxer, until Hillary won the nomination

Then I'd back the nominee.

[understandinglife]

31. Ditto.

Members of Congress, from left to right, Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) head down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House, June 16, to deliver petitions demanding President Bush tell the truth on Downing Street Memo evidence that he lied to sell the Iraq war to the American people.

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/7266/1/275

Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - Any candidate worthy of our vote in the 2006 Congressional elections should have filed charges against Bu$h and the neoconsters before March 19 2006.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

44. Ditto here too.

Senator Boxer is my number one pick for Human Being of the Year and I adore her. Having said that, if Senator Clinton (let's start using that title as I don't really hear the pubs calling their front runners John or Bill) I will work hard for her win.

[NoPasaran]

30. The one who I thought could win

[brook]

33. Boxer.

'Conciliation" has done much to get us where we are today. It's time for shedding the milquetoast approach. Boxer has tthe moxey.

[grace0418]

34. Barbara Boxer. Dems keep "playing the game" by the fucking

Republican's rules and losing. I don't give a shit about their goddamn game. They're always going to win at their game because no trick is too dirty, no rumor is too below-the-belt, no lie is too absurd for them. They will do absolutely anything to win their game. So I say we stop playing their game and start telling the truth. Which is what Barbara Boxer is doing.

[oasis]

35. Hillary for president of U.S.and Boxer for president of DU. A win/win.

;-)

[Oversea Visitor]

36. Boxer

For the people by the people. Only Senator that dare support election fraud. She dare to take a stand. And she does her homework. But hell who want that job after the trainwreck created by Chimp. Whoever is the President got a damn tough job ahead.

[me b zola]

37. Boxer. n/t

[Oversea Visitor]

38. Boxer

For the people by the people. Only Senator that dare support election fraud. She dare to take a stand. And she does her homework. But hell who want that job after the trainwreck created by Chimp. Whoever is the President got a damn tough job ahead.

[XemaSab]

39. Boxer

100%

[OxQQme]

40. Why pit them against each other?

But then who would be prez and which one VP?

[wherewingstakedream]

41. Boxer

:bounce:

[Orsino]

You mean which would I rather see...

...assassinated by the MSM as Jeb is installed?

Hillary deserves it more.

[MisterP]

42. Boxer

[merbex]

43. Boxer, -easy,easy choice!n/t

[Algomas]

45. Boxer

[nonconformist]

46. Boxer, HANDS DOWN nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

47. Hands Down , Barbara!

:hi:

[Straight Shooter]

49. Boxer. She reminds me of the saying, "No guts, no glory."

She's got guts, and she deserves the glory.


edit to add, with the exception of Bobby Kennedy, I hesitate to endorse more than one family member as POTUS. I'm sure there are arguments for and against, but Hillary was very engaged as Bill's partner in the running of the White House. It's not necessary to have her there again.

[Raksha]

50. That's a no-brainer: Barbara Boxer. n/t

[Cleita]

51. Boxer. She's been a senator longer than Hillary and

has remained uncorrupted by politics as usual.

[Pastiche423]

53. Boxer

Would not even consider Clinton.

[tomg]

54. Boxer

Not even a second thought

[shanti]

55. boxer

no contest

[spindoctor]

56. Hilary who? Barbare will do just fine, thank you

[Blue Belle]

57. Boxer...

But there would be other Dems that I'd choose first over either of them.

[bunny planet]

58. Boxer of course.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[atomicdawg38]

60. Boxer

[newyawker99]

90. Hi atomicdawg38!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

98. hey atomicdawg WELCOME to DU!!!

:woohoo:

[maveric]

61. Boxer

I have my suspicions about Hillary.

[SoCalDem]

62. easy one

Barbara

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

63. Republican lite vs libDem? Boxer, of course.

Hillary would make a good Republcan senator from Kansas or Indiana. Not that I'd vote for her there either.

[Snivi Yllom]

65. is that a joke

Boxer, not even close

but Hillary if it came to a smackdown, Hillary would have the deep pockets. That would be a hell of a primary.

[Vinca]

67. Boxer. Hands down. nt

[Hun Joro]

68. Boxer, no question

[Nickster]

69. Sen Boxer without even a second thought.

[UdoKier]

70. Boxer.

Hillary = CAFTA, no withdrawal from Iraq, probably more unnecessary wars, just with slightly better rationales, more supply-side economic policies, possibly another try at "Hillarycare", which was to be a huge giveaway to insurance companies, and NOT single-payer, more McJobs replacing well-paying union jobs, more slashing of the federal safety net...

Boxer by a mile.

I respect Hillary. She's one of the brightest, most competent republicans I know of.

[merh]

72. Boxer

:thumbsup:

[Walt Starr]

73. Hillary for the win

Barbara Boxer rocks, but she could never win nationally.

[oasis]

77. I doubt if Boxer would consider running. She's free to attack the GOP

at will. Some DUers want ALL Dems to be Micheal Moore type attack dogs. They don't realize that there must be voices of moderation within the party in order for it to survive.

That said, Barbara Boxer has always been a favorite of mine.

[LiberalAndProud]

111. I can't speak nationally, but I can speak from the Center of the Red Sea.

Respectfully disagree.
Hillary doesn't stand a chance in Nebraska or Kansas. I oppine that much of what's the matter with Kansas is outrage at a President who should have known better (I refer to Hillary's husband). The blue dress hurt our party. We need no reminders in this land-locked region.

Give me someone I can work for here. Please.

[insane_cratic_gal]

74. Boxer

You know what your getting with Boxer.

Hillary.. *shrug* I just have little trust there. She would need to start earning my trust

[napi21]

76. Hillary. She draws lightening bolts, but knows how to deal with them.

Barbara is GREAT in her job, but she's not nearly a quick on her feet as Hillary! Hillary has been through the toughest political war I can ever remember, and she knows how to deal with them.

Barb is ding a good job in the House. Let her do it!

[Seabiscuit]

78. A no-brainer: Boxer, Boxer, Boxer and Boxer!

Hillary's become a corporate butt-kissing fuckwad.

[donheld]

79. Boxer

In a heartbeat. I say she could win. Hillary has too much baggage, both from the left and the right.

[wuushew]

81. Hillary is only guaranteed 217 electoral votes

a worse gamble than Kerry was IMHO.

[oasis]

83. So you're saying Boxer would do better?

[wuushew]

84. No, but factor in the Republican coat-tail effect if Hillary runs

large turnout swamping what might otherwise several competitive Congressional races.

The ideal strategy is a finding a candidate that excites the greatest number of Democratic voters and depresses the Republican base to the largest extent.

Have we found that governor yet?

[oasis]

85. Hillary's move to the middle will put her in better shape in 2008. Red

staters who refuse to vote for the repackaged Hillary would more than likely vote a straight GOP ticket anyway.

[B Calm]

82. Boxer

[Not_Giving_Up]

86. Boxer

No question.

[pookieblue]

87. Boxer, no question about it.

I'll support her all the way. She has more balls than most men.

[Gelliebeans]

88. Boxer

[Individualist]

91. Boxer

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

92. Boxer.

[Bouncy Ball]

93. Boxer.

I didn't even have to think about it. If that's my choice, it's Boxer all the way.

[zinndependence]

94. definitely boxer!

there is just something about Hillary....

[BIG Sean]

95. HIllary of course!

Don't get me wrong, Boxer is great, but I feel Hillary has a better chance of gaining support. I do have a problem with some of Hillary's positions (i.e the Patriot Act) but I want her so much more than another neo-con Republican with a war agenda.

[DefenseLawyer]

96. Since neither has a chance to win

a general election for President in 2008, I would have to go with neither. Sorry, numbers rarely lie.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

97. BOXER!!! and i'm a NYer

[4_Legs_Good]

99. Boxer, but NO MORE SENATORS please!!!

[Groggy]

100. Barbara Boxer...n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

102. Barbara Boxer

[Ilsa]

103. Boxer. Didn't even have to think about it. eom

[ArnoldLayne]

104. Boxer

[bdot]

105. Canada...

or maybe Mexico.

[freedomburn]

106. Boxer. No doubt whatsoever.

[Merope215]

107. Boxer.

I LOVE Barbara Boxer. She's tops in my book.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

108. Boxer

I'm tired of Democrats who don't stand for anything.

[katinmn]

109. Boxer in a heartbeat!

[LiberalAndProud]

110. Barbara Boxer.

Fearless, fearless woman. Please give me the chance to vote for this woman.

P.S. I want her on the ballot. Conyers for Secretary of State.

[LordshipLadyship]

113. Boxer nt

[friesianrider]

114. BOXER...hands down.

Hillary is scaring the shit out of my lately....sounding like Republican Lite.

[NoSheep]

115. Boxer.

[lonestarnot]

116. God this is a tough question because I love Barbara Boxer, but I think

I am going to have to go with Hillary because the Big Dog would be back in the house. I also think she has a better chance of winning.

[LSK]

117. Boxer

Although I would have to be more informed on both of them.

[LightningFlash]

118. Boxer to the very end. And never waiver.

[Pachamama]

119. Boxer with all my heart, energy and my checkbook!

That woman is amazing....:hug: She is smart, tough, honest, unwaivering

While I like Hillary Clinton, she evokes way too much anger from the other side....

Besides - in 2008, I don't want anyone on the ticket with the last name "Bush" or "Clinton"....

[fhqwhgads]

123. if it comes down...

...to hillary clinton and barbara boxer...we're dead meat. both of them would get annihilated in a general election. if hillary were to get the nom, the republicans would find a veep candidate with crossover appeal (like a giuliani or a mccain), and we'd lose a bad race bloody. pachamama is right - the other side hates her like we hate chimpy. hell, maybe they wouldn't have to find a crossover candidate - they could just make the campaign a referendum on hillary.

as for boxer, she wouldn't even make it out of the primaries. a liberal democrat from california? i can dream...but then i wake up.

look, i like boxer and kucinich and conyers as much as the next true-blue dem, but they have zero chance in a general. we cannot nominate someone who is recognized as being from the left flank of the democratic party. even the republicans couldn't do it in 2000 - remember chimpy with his "uniter, not a divider" nonsense? no one really knew anything about him, other than that he was the son of a former president who was perceived as moderate. the average schmo had no idea he was a wackaloon.

maybe the play is to go find a candidate who is not from a really blue state, and doesn't project the image of a weenie, but who otherwise isn't all that well-known. maybe someone like mark warner?

and for the love of god, can we find some strategists who aren't dlc hacks, who can unite the party, and who are willing to play dirty? hell, if we can find them sooner rather than later, maybe we can make up some ground in congress, to make the uphill battle for the white house in '08 a little less uphill.

eh...i'm beginning to ramble and not make sense. here endeth the post.

[fhqwhgads]

125. i didn't...

...actually answer the question though, did i? if it came down to hillary and boxer i'd endorse boxer. but i'd also be gearing up for four long years of another republican president.

[TWiley]

122. Neither, the Reich Wing has picked our candidates

Don't get me wrong, I admire both ladies. However, why is it that the only people talking about Hillary running for president are the fundamentalist Christians, and the Right Wing talking heads like Limbaugh.

They want to pick a defeatable candidate for us.

[noonwitch]

124. Hillary has a better chance of winning

Boxer is too far left. So am I, but I recognize that the average american is centrist.

[indypaul]

126. Neither. n/t

[SeattleRob]

127. Boxer - No Hesitation! n/t

[Postman]

128. Boxer

n/t