Hillary will win in '08 - it's inevitable

[accipiter]

If she runs she will get the nomination.

The pubs will nominate a monumental loser in '08. Jeb won't run, he'll wait, and quite sensibly too. Arnold won't have an amendment in time. The pubs will also have a very divisive and bruising primary fight. There will a far right wing figure like Santorum or Judge Moore that will play to the far right base and rip the party in two and alienate moderates.

Hillary will have excitement around her. No doubt she will be controversial, but she will spark imaginations around the country. Americans like divisive figures - when they stand tough: like Reagan, Bill Clinton, and dubya. Hillary will fit that bill to a tee. It will be close, but she'll hold onto all the Gore/Kerry states and pull away New Mexico and Florida (she'll win Florida because of fears about SS).

Americans will be looking for a change. Debt and war will shake the confidence of our country, and the Clintons will be there to pick up the pieces. The winds will be blowing in our direction. The media will even be surprisingly friendly. The pubs will have a bruising primary, and will scare people with their infighting and rhetoric. All their attacks on Hillary will be similarly colored in the minds of Americans.

The real fight will be in 2012 - when Jeb runs against Hillary. That will be the epic confrontation between the right and the left that will set the future of our country for the next fifty years.

[Padraig18]

1. Hillary won't win 2 primaries, much less the GE.

:eyes:

[accipiter]

4. You are out of touch

just wait and see.

[Padraig18]

11. I'm not out of touch at all.

I'm quite politically savvy; Hillary is poison, and most Democrats with any political acumen understand that.

[0007]

67. I'm sure Hillary will test the water before getting serious one

way or the other, but I do tend to agree with you. Perhaps junior will take all the steam out of the repukes during the next four years?

[serryjw]

80. Depends on how healthy Bill is!

I totally agree that she will not win 2 primaries.BUT she has to think about Bill's health. Persoanlly I don't think he will be up for it.

[LSK]

89. wait and see??? you thought the swiftboats crap was bad....

Wait till the right has a chance at "Hitlery". They already have a name for her. The corporate media will TOTALLY CRUSH and DESTROY her. No way she will have a chance. The garbage and fabrications they will make up about Whitewater will be unbelievable.

[niceypoo]

133. The right already went after Hillary in the 90s

They blew their wad

[sendero]

94. Do you live in NY or something?

Because most assuredly you are the one who is out of touch.

Outside of 3-5 states, Hillary could not get elected dogcatcher.

[OneBlueSky]

63. agreed . . . they'll crucify her . . .

she'll have to spend ALL her time defending herself, and whatever message she tries to get across will be totally lost . . . slim chance she'll be nominated, and absolutely no chance she'll be elected . . .

[niceypoo]

134. Shes a Clinton, they dont get defensive

The right blew their wad already

[Yupster]

71. Don't know about the general election, but

once Hillary says she's running in the primaries, the race will be over.

The cable stations will go on a 24 hour Hillary tour that will last for weeks.

She won't make speeches or answer questions. She'll just do "appearances."

The crowds will go wild, the press will go nuts, and the other Democratic candidates won't have a chance of getting a lick of press time.

That's my prediction.

[On the Road]

2. Somehow I Don't Think Either One Will Win the Nomination

It will be someone not on the radar today. Who knew Bill Clinton in 1989?

[accipiter]

7. He was known

[On the Road]

99. Yes, He Was Known

but no one in 1989 regarded Clinton as one of the most likely nominees. I think it will be the same in 2008.

[no name no slogan]

108. Yeah, he was known as the blowhard of the '88 convention

...who gave possibly the most boring, longwinded nomination speech in convention history.

Sorry, but if Hillary runs, they'll "Deanify" her. The press will build her up, and then hit her like a neutron bomb once she peaks. The backlash will be spectacular.

Besides, Hillary is the completely wrong image for this party. We don't win by running another upper-class white yuppie who hasn't worked at anything but politics for her entire life. We'll get murdered so bad it will make Mondale's defeat look like a day at the beach.

[Vektor]

3. Wow!

Sounds exciting! I can't wait to see how much of this comes to pass.
Oh, and, WELCOME TO DU, accipiter!
:hi:

[keithjx]

5. I'm reserving my judgement on Hillary for a bit.

Just not convinced she's the right one for the pres at the time, cuz i don't know how far down the spiral we'll be then....
KJ

[Kelvin Mace]

6. Nope, not going to happen

Unlike Bill, even people on the left don't like Hillary.

Her new overtures to the Right and her opposition to Dean is not making her any friends here either.


The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[accipiter]

9. People have short memories - just wait, she'll be accepted with

open arms - she'll heat up the rhetoric - and we'll all love it. And she'll believe it too - she hates the right wing.

[Kelvin Mace]

35. Too much a "politician"

willing to do or say whatever to get elected.

[Clark2008]

130. I don't know a soul who would vote for her

She'll lose every primary in every red state - unless the Republicans play games (we have open primaries). But, since they will be choosing between some combination of Dumb and Dumber, they'll be too busy voting in their own primaries.

[paulk]

13. the left not liking Hillary

will help, not hurt her.

[Kelvin Mace]

18. Uh, no.

The right is NEVER going to vote for her. The center is not a large voting block.


The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[paulk]

51. uh, yeah

the center is the LARGEST voting block. How do you think her hubby got elected?

[dansolo]

54. Charisma

Something that Hillary lacks. Bill Clinton was able to get a lot of Republican votes because of his charm and charisma. Hillary is not the same as Bill. She will be clobbered in a general election.

[paulk]

65. We really won't know what Hillary's appeal will be

until she runs a national campaign.

I don't think she will appeal to the south like her hubby did, though.

All this talk of how Hillary will or won't do is... rather premature, IMHO. Three years is several lifetimes in politics.

[Kelvin Mace]

88. The answer would be Ross Perot

or have you forgotten?

[paulk]

103. that is simply not true

this has been debunked numerous times - all polling at the time had Clinton winning comfortably without Perot in the race.

[Kelvin Mace]

106. Polls don't exactly have the greatest credibility these days

I didn't hear many liberals or Dems flocking to Perot. I heard lots of Pub's loving him.

The center is NOT a large voting block.


The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[paulk]

115. anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much

real numbers do.


http://www.leinsdorf.com/perot.htm


"The 1992 presidential election was an analyst's dream. Usually, the presidential candidate runs far ahead of the rest of the ticket. Perot's presence in the presidential race combined with an absence of running mates for lesser offices meant that Clinton and Bush ran behind their respective party's nominees for Governor, Senator and the House. Consequently, it was easy to follow Perot's voters as they voted for other offices. They voted for Democratic and Republican Governor, Senator and House of Representative candidates in sufficient numbers to give them higher vote totals than Clinton and Bush.

This assumes that all Clinton's supporters voted for the other Democratic candidates and all Bush's supporters voted for the Republican candidates for Governor, Senator and the House. Since Republican candidates for other offices received more votes than Bush, and Democratic candidates for other offices received more votes than Clinton, this is a statistically valid assumption. The higher vote totals for the non-presidential candidates had to come from Perot's voters.

In the Governor's races, Perot's voters cast 18% of their ballots for the Republican candidates; 56% of their ballots for Democratic candidates, 17% for independent candidates, and 8% did not bother to vote for Governor. If Perot's voters had voted for Bush and Clinton in the same proportion that the voted for the Republican and Democratic candidates for Governor, Clinton's lead would have increased by 7.5 million votes.

In the Senate races, Perot's supporters voted 27% for the Republican candidates, 24% for the Democratic candidates, 23% for the independent candidates, and 24% skipped the Senate races entirely. (This does not include states that did not have Senate races.)

In the House races, Perot's voters cast 22% of their ballots for Republican candidates, 19% for Democratic candidates, 18% for independent candidates, and 40% did not vote in House races.

Perot's voters voted overwhelmingly for Democratic Governor candidates, and only marginally in favor of the Republican candidates for the House and Senate. Perot's voters favored Republican Senate candidates by 2.28%, and Republican House candidates by 2.69%. Because Perot's voters were only 1/5th of the total, that translates into about another 500,000 votes or 0.5% for bush if they had voted in a two way presidential race the same way they voted for the Senate and House. That is about 1/7th of the margin by which Bush lost."

[Kelvin Mace]

119. Key words

"This assumes..."

'nuff said.

I see no reason to vote AGAIN for someone who voted FOR the Patriot Act and voted FOR war in Iraq and now voted FOR Rice.

A real liberal please. I've had enough of politicians who do wahtever is needed to get elected.


The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.


Any Dem who refuses to understand this undeniable truth will never win AND is utterly clueless.

[paulk]

120. I'm not defending Hillary

I'm pointing out that you made a statement, a statement that gets repeated by many of a certain ideological bent, that isn't true. It is provably not true. That you choose to reject this information is your own loss - if you want to base your political strategy on falsehoods, that's your business.

I'm providing this information for other, hopefully more interested readers, who might which to gain a better understanding of the political landscape, (and how to deal with it), based on reality instead of an ideologically driven wish list.

[Leafy Geneva]

114. H. Ross Perot

[mdmc]

27. you got it!

Apt I say, APT!

[cestpaspossible]

8. I've looked to Hillary for inspiration and been disappointed

time and time again. I would happily vote for her for Senator if I were a NY resident, though.

[wyldwolf]

10. Hey! Let's start a Hillary betting pool!

Losers have to contribute to winners favorite liberal cause.

[arcane1]

12. NO CLINTONS, NO BUSHES

gods, it's like people are turning this country into a monarchy...

NO ROYAL FAMILIES

:eyes:

[accipiter]

14. the Clintons were not born into the ruling class

[arcane1]

17. what difference does that make?

just because her last name is Clinton doesn't guarantee she'd even win a single primary

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Niether were Reagan, Nixon, or Hitler.

What's your point?

[Patiod]

15. No, she won't

Why is it always newbies who suggest this? I am in no way suggesting any trolling - maybe just that they haven't been around hard-core dems enough to realize Hillary is almost unanimously a non-starter with rank-and-file Dems.

[arcane1]

19. I love the ones who...

say Chelsea will be president in 12 years :crazy:

you know us lib'ruls, as long as it's a Clinton, we'll vote for it, apparently, according to said newbies :eyes:

[accipiter]

22. I'm not a newbie to politics - it's almost inevitible - she will be the

next president.

[arcane1]

26. and you base this on what, exactly?

:shrug:

[DrGonzoLives]

16. Wrong

n/t

[ecoalex]

31. Hillie is a DLC Dem

Haven't we had enough of the corporate Democratic Party? Have you seen DLC Bill in with the corporate crook w? Time for a Dem party that is progressive, not regressive to people like the DLC.

PEOPLE POWER WORKS !

[noonwitch]

20. I'll vote for her

She'd be a great president. She's smart, she is poised and there's no secret scandal out there, her baggage is well-known, thus not shocking to the public.

Plus, I want to see right wingers go nuts when she wins, it will be fun to watch. Maybe she'll find a way to turn the Patriot Act around on the more nutty ones who threaten to start a new revolution if she's elected, the way Janet Reno used RICO against Operation Rescue.

[Dawgs]

49. Agree...

There are too many DUers that think they speak for all Dems.

Well, at this point I would love to see Hillary run. She would kick ass and make a good run at the White House. The only thing stopping her would be a better opponent.

[greatauntoftriplets]

21. It'll never happen....

..although I think she is running. The repukes would salivate at the smear campaign they would run. Hell, they'll probably haul out Monica Lewinsky and her navy blue dress.

:eyes:

[accipiter]

23. the pubs will be short-circuited and attacking themselves

They will be a party divided, and will look weak.

Americans will be nervous and scared and want a change. Hillary will represent that change, boy will she ever.

[greatauntoftriplets]

29. Divided by whom?

And how? In case you haven't noticed, the repukes pretty much stay on message.

The 2004 election cycle proved that -- no matter how nervous and scared Americans are -- they did not want change.

The more likely repuke candidate in 2008 is Frist.

[accipiter]

36. Did you read all of my initial post?

Or did you just read the title and then chime in?

[greatauntoftriplets]

40. I read the entire post.

You haven't answered my questions.

[Clark2008]

131. I hope it is Frist.

He has the charisma of a left-over balogna sandwich and I've got some dirt on him!

:thumbsup:

[mdmc]

24. Rudy will wipe the floor with her in 2006

She has been an awful Senator to the Empire State. Rudy will either have his way with her or she will get narrowly reelected.

[accipiter]

32. Rudy will be soundly beaten - in fact, he may not even run

He already knows deep in his heart he will lose if he runs against her. People in NY are getting tired of his schtick.

[mdmc]

38. He won't run

But he will beat her in opinion polls up and down the dial.
While Chuck Schumer has worked hard to represent all of NY, Hill has been stuck in Manhattan. She barely makes it past Westchester county.

I hope Tom Gallisano runs against her, supports medical marijuana, and get endorsed by Rudy.

[hughee99]

53. I think people in NY are getting tired of her schtick too.

[Yupster]

72. don't think Rudy runs

In New York an incumbent Democratic senator is not going to be beaten.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. Well, she would boost the Green vote.

Americans may well be looking for a change. But, they'll be looking for a real one, not some pale imitation of Bush.

[Connie_Corleone]

28. You're right.

When does the Hillary betting pool start...2006?

[saracat]

33. I don't know anyone who would vote for that back stabbing

Bush supporting bitch. She is going to have a tough time getting reelected in New York let alone running for President. I would have voted for her four years ago but she certainly has proven herself republican lite. Never. I would campaign against her.

[HughBeaumont]

34. I'm calling bullshit on your whole post.

Hillary 08 = unmitigated disaster. No red state will vote for her, and she will convert a few blues to red. Count on it. Rethugs WANT her to run so badly it smells. They aren't fooling anybody.

[accipiter]

37. They are bluffing - they're scared of Hillary - I've seen it

with my own eyes.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Joe Chi Minh]

64. Rowlocks!

The time when they really were terrified of him was during the Lewinski/Starr hunting of the President, and the idea was first mooted. You should have sen old Larry and his Republcian pals. Real problems with their bowels. But that's then. The Dems now have a "New Deal" hero, in peace and war, who thrashed your lot from * to breakfast, i.e. a massive landslide. Where have you been Rip Van Winkle?

[saltpoint]

39. Exciting predictions, but my call is that she will be whomped --

-- in the Iowa caucuses.

John Edwards may be in the race, and he almost beat Kerry in Iowa last time. Wes Clark continues to have enormous appeal. Richardson is both from a western state and can appeal to Hispanics. If Dean is not our Chairman, he's free to re-enter the fray and energize his supporters. Mark Warner is a sharp guy and a Southern governor with appeal in Dixie. Barbara Boxer is feared by the Right, but she could likely energize a larger base than Hillary, especially lately. I don't see Hillary getting our nomination unless she could outflank California's favorite daughter candidate.

I've left out several other possible candidates, but on my own list, I rank Hillary 'unlikely' to get the nomination and 'nearly impossible' for general election.

[Jacobin]

41. Oh, Okay. Then we needn't bother with politics for the next

eight years. It's inevitable.

:eyes:

Happily, methinks your crystal ball is cracked.

[Stand and Fight]

43. Hillary will lose in 2008.

In the primaries and in the general election. Everything you have said are right wing talking points about whom our candidate will be in 2008. Hillary Clinton represents the Republicans dream candidate for the Democratic party because they know that they will be able to rip her to pieces. Much the same that we wish they would put forward Newt Gingrich! They will sever her and use her connections to organization like NOW to decimate her character. They will do even more of a hack job on her than they did John Kerry. She is a much, much too polarizing figure to when the Democratic party nomination. Your whole scenario ignores the fact that a wide number of Democrats and Republicans think it would be a huge mistake to have Hillary run in 2008. If we put forward Hillary Clinton we will LOSE by a huge amount in 2008 and then the Republicans will REALLY have a mandate. Based on the emotional logic in your post, I bet you think Joe Lieberman would make a great candidate too, huh?

[accipiter]

44. Joe would be a horrilbe candidate - he lacks charisma and media savvy

Hillary has both. The pubs will be divided against themselves, and will be weak - they will have no wind at their sails.

War and debt and other worries will plauge the minds of voters. They will want a change.

Hillary will win the primaries. You'll be amazed at how quick she comes out swinging at the pubs and how well organized she will be. She will swamp the competition.

[Stand and Fight]

46. Charisma you say...

I'm going to post a poll and see if people agree with your arduous and misplaced assessment.

I betting you they will not agree with you.

[accipiter]

47. DU is not where this fight will be fought

Very few here backed Kerry in the primary.

[saracat]

50. I backed Kerry. He is a true liberal.

And I would NOT vote for Hillary. Notice Kerry votes against all the Repuke candidates and bills and Hillary votes for them. Why would a Kerry supporter want to vote for a repug lite?

[Stand and Fight]

52. I backed Clark in the primaries...

I backed Clark in the primaries and Kerry in the general, of course. (Never had a problem with Kerry, but I knew the Republicans would dig up his stance on Vietnam and his Senate voting record -- never dreamed they'd attack his service record though...) I still feel that Wesley Clark is a serious contender for 2008.

Nonetheless, I seriously disagree with your assessment that this fight will not be fought on DU. While you have a point that it will not physically be decided here, I have observed -- from being very involved in local politics, in Oklahoma of all places -- that DU is has collectively been right on a number of issues most of the time. DU is very much a mirror of the Democratic pulse.

[Clark Bayh 2008]

97. I hope you're right

Please... will someone explain to me... anyone who has been awake over the past two years .... why any Dems would support someone besides Clark in 2008 if we're still "at war"?

Is it that Dems no longer have net access & cannot read post election polls, or that they cannot download a map of the red states?

I'm can't comprehend Bush voters, but I accept that they are sheep, frozen by fear of terrorism, and seduced by their love of the military, & the apple pies aphorism slinging of Karl Rovism.

What is utterly unfathomable is that some Democrats insist on more Hillary, more Dean, more NE liberalism in pursuit of some sort of windmill tilting exercise in martyrdom. These folks think "our philosophy will ultimately be proven right in the next life so we should put up people who will lose". Does this still make sense to any Dem who actually lives, works, and votes in this country?

Would someone explain to me how anyone with the liberal label or a northeast address gets to 270 electoral votes?

[WI_DEM]

45. If she ran she would be very formidable and be the front runner

whether she could go the distance and actually win the nomination is too early to tell. Depends on what her opposition is. Dems could have a very brusing primary as well.

[Yupster]

73. I just think that once Hillary announces,

it will be impossible for any other Democratic candidate to get any press because the newspeople will be doing a 24 hour Hillarython.

[Blue_In_AK]

48. Hillary's a poser n/t

[cap]

55. Hill will run if she thinks she can win...

and she will swing left after election...watch and see...Nixon was scared of her for a reason.

Right now she is keeping a low profile...we need different types of people to go and kick a-- and different ones as candidates.

[DeaScream]

56. I don't think she has

a chance.

[accipiter]

57. It's your worst nightmare

and when it happens I wonder how you'll handle it.

[Sleepless In NY]

58. She'll be lucky if she wins her senate seat

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[LittleClarkie]

60. Two things: How is she hanging tough

I don't see it in her voting.

Second, I predict she will be the Howard Dean of 2007 -- frontrunner until somebody actually casts a vote.

[Generic Other]

61. I'm waiting to see if she keeps her senate seat

I'm hoping she does, but she is a woman with a big target on her back, and the swiftboats will be launched on the whitewater the second she throws her hat into the ring. I for one don't relish riding those rapids again.

[Walt Starr]

62. If the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton in 2008

I'll be working for a third party candidate for certain as it will be the best year possible for a third party to make inroads into the duopoly.

Hillary Clinton would suffer the worst loss in history.

[BornaDem]

66. We should only get so lucky as to have to face Santorum or...

Judge Moore as the Republican nominee no matter whether our nominee is Hillary or someone else. The way our luck has been running of late, I would bet the Republican nominee will not be "a far right wing figure," but we can hope.

[GOPBasher]

68. I like her, but I don't think she can win the general election. nt

[98geoduck]

69. I have a family of republicans in NY and they voted for Kerry...

Because they despise Bush so much...

Hillary will not get one of their votes.

[martymar64]

70. Hillary is the RW's wet dream candidate

She may have the Clinton name but she isn't Bill. Maybe I'll start looking at her seriously when she actually VOTES IN OUR INTEREST instead of rubberstamping Bush's bills.

[liberalpragmatist]

74. Democrats Almost Never Nominate Who You Think They Will

Democrats eat their frontrunners alive. The one exception is Kerry and even that was very tenuous - he had a very tenuous time as media-driven "frontrunner" in spring '03 but before then it was seen as a Gore renomination and then once Howard Dean's movement grew, Dean seemed assured the nomination.

Every other year it was someone totally different:

1) 1968 - LBJ then RFK; Nominee: Humphrey

2) 1972 - Ed Muskie of ME; Nominee: George McGovern

3) 1976 - Scoop Jackson; Nominee: Jimmy Carter

4) 1980 - incumbent, still, Kennedy seen as likely: nominee: Jimmy Carter

5) 1984 - Mondale or John Glenn. It actually was Mondale, but Glenn went poof!

6) 1988 - Gary Hart then Mario Cuomo; nominee: Michael Dukakis

7) 1992 - Mario Cuomo, then Sam Nunn or Al Gore or Bill Bradley
Nominee: Bill Clinton

8) 2000 - Al Gore

So except for renominations or incumbent vice presidents, all Democratic primary contests have gone to someone few would have considered earlier.

[radio4progressives]

75. You are sadly mistaken. I used to be a supporter ... but NOT anymore

and i am not alone.

[sarahlee]

76. Hillary would be a sure loss

I really dislike the woman and so do most progressives. Nominate Hillary and you sign the party's death certificate.

[ThorsHammer]

77. Very possible

(copied from an earlier post)

If things don't get better in Iraq, and the economy stays slow, a tree stump could defeat the GOP candidate. Keep in mind K/E got 49%, and many moderates will likely hit a tipping point. I do NOT wish Iraq to get worse, nor do I hope the economy stays bad, but if things stay bad then the Democratic candidate will win and win big.

[Dark]

78. Arnold wouldn't get anyone's vote.

And the real fight was this year, with several SC judges retiring. That will set the course of the Country for the next half-century.

[FrenchieCat]

79. Fortunately....

the only "inevitable" ...is that we all shit and have to die.

I'll never say never, never again.....cause I thought it was "inevitable" that Howard Dean was going to be the Democratic nominee (back in August of '03)......and that Bush was getting out of the White House (pre Nov of '04).

Now I'm back to the fact that we shit and we die....and that's the only "inevitable".

[marcologico]

81. First she has to slay the dragon.

Whoever leads the impeachment charge gets the nomination. Could be Hillary, could be Boxer, but right now my bet's on Kerry.

[LittleClarkie]

84. And then find the chalice from the palace with the brew that is true

I watch too much television.

Hey, maybe the Lucky 13 will be our knights of the Round Table.

Dean can be Merlin.

Still looking for Arthur though.

[Silverhair]

95. Leads the impeachment charge?? Like Pickett's charge???

Prediction: Any Democratic attempt at impeachment of Bush will be just as successful as Lee's order to charge the center of the Union line at Gettysburg.

[marcologico]

100. It doesn't really have to succeed, they just have to keep hounding him

just like they hounded Bill. Who better than Hillary to beat Dubya with that stick? Unfortunately I don't think she has it in her, but it's her only hope of ever getting nominated IMO.

[high density]

82. I like the Clintons, but...

I don't think Hillary Clinton is ever going to be president. If she does throw her hat into the ring, I'm sure the corporate media will hype her to death during the primary season and then unload a ton of shit on her after she gets the nomination. (Basically a replay of the 2004 campaign season.)

The biggest problem with Hillary is that she already has this loony-left image stuck on her and most people aren't aware that she's a moderate Democrat. If we're going to run a moderate, why not run somebody who is perceived as a moderate?

[Clarkie1]

83. Uh....no. Good imagination, though n/t

[woodleydem]

85. Hillary too polarizing? Kind of like Bush.

Immediately after the election, I thought nominating Hillary would be a huge mistake in '08, mainly because it seemingly wouldn't solve any problems that Kerry had to deal with. Republicans wouldn't have to alter their strategy with Hillary--paint her as a Northeastern liberal that is out of touch with the mainstream. But then the words of James Carville struck me--"The Democrats could nominate a liberal, gay senator from Hollywood if we had a narrative." Kerry's main problem was that he had no narrative or theme to his campaign. People may have wanted to vote for him, but in their minds, they didn't know what the heck he stood for. He ran a bad campaign with a bad political operation. Hillary won't have that same problem. Even before I know who will run against her in the primaries, I can say that Hillary will have the best and most politically savvy campaign apparatus working for her. Remember, Bill was the first President to have a modern political "war room" set up to deal with any political attacks. She will have a narrative, and she will have a clear message which she will stick to. If Hillary were to get someone like Wes Clark as her running mate, it would also nullify the inevitable "weak Dem" tag that the Republicans will try to use. Is Hillary really more polarizing than Bush? I don't think she is. (BTW, her Senate voting record is actually surprising centrist.)

[CWebster]

92. A clear narrative, huh?

On the Iraq war? On separation of church and state? On abortion?

She is damaged goods on the Right and on the Left.

[Tinoire]

86. Ah yes... The "Draft Hillary" grassroots movement starting here

Lol. LMAO.

[Hissyspit]

87. Run Another Senator?

[ultraist]

90. A WOMAN President in four years? HIGHLY DOUBT IT

This country is no where NEAR electing a woman for the most powerful position in the world. We have yet to have a woman VP and have proportionately few women Senators.

Don't think so. If she is our candidate, we are screwed.

RECENTLY, there has been anti women's rights legislation passed, we are in the midst of a backlash and the conservatives are winning. WHY all of sudden, would our country be liberal enough to elect a woman for President?

[CWebster]

91. The Clintons DO NOT represent change

That is the problem.

The Bushes and the Clintons do not rule this country--they have to go.

[Silverhair]

93. All this reminds me of the demand for Teddy to run.

It seemed like every four years there would be a lot of talk in the party of Teddy Kennedy as the dream candidate who would restore Camelot. Finally, in 80 he ran, Carter whipped his ass, and there is no more talk of him as a dream anything.

Hillary will go down in flames too, although she may get the nomination.

[Clark Bayh 2008]

96. Interesting

If McCain runs, he'll win. If he doesn't run, the Dems have a chance with Clark. I don't see how a pro choice candidate gets thru the republican primaries.

Nominating Hillary would be a repeat of the 1972 nomination of McGovern. Good message, good person, wrong messenger, wrong time, wrong electorate.

How does Hillary put together more than 200 electoral votes?

[leesa]

98. Funny how it's usually GOP supporters floating Hillary as a choice for us.

I certainly do not want Hillary. She is a warmonger.

[ElectroPrincess]

101. Yes, it cracks me up in an inane way ... sort of like my right wing

friend shamelessly promoting Lieberman during the primaries. She'd quip "Now if you nominate Joe Lieberman, I just might consider voting for a democrat." SURE! <eg> And da check's in the mail? LOL

Almost as funny as my right wing brother trying to convince me that Bush wasn't that much of an IDIOT before the 2000 election. "But Sis, he has many intelligent and experienced advisers." Hum, naw!

[IrateCitizen]

102. There's no way Hillary will win a GE in 2008...

She'll galvanize the RW against her, and she'll alienate a vast majority of the left/progressive wing of the party. At best, left progressives will vote for her but refuse to do any campaign work on her behalf. At worst, they will desert her entirely and either vote 3rd party or not at all.

Hillary is my Senator, and the one thing she has done a fine job of is alienating the progressive wing of her base while doing very little to stand up to the RW juggernaught. It's not like she has to worry about being from a red state or anything. The impression one is left with is that her primary concerns are her ambition and political opportunism, with actually sticking up for those who need stuck up for way down on the list of her priorities.

[Cocoa]

104. sounds plausible to me

who knows what will happen, but the thought of Hillary running for president is an exciting thought for me.

I'd personally prefer and would probably vote for a more overtly progressive candidate (though I think Hillary's centrist appearance is a cover -- I think she's a stealth progressive), but Hillary's intangibles might outweigh the policy.

And I think you're exactly right about the RWers fearing her.

[CWebster]

105. Yep, just like Kerry was so much more electible

and such a strong closer.

Those were the promises last time with us all on board and Kerry running as a neutered centrist.

Once bitten...

ABB as a battlecry is sounding mighty meek these days.

[Cocoa]

107. I think the comparison to Kerry is apt

I see Kerry and Clinton in the same way.

I preferred other more openly progressive candidates to Kerry in the primaries, but Kerry had some intangibles that I think made him the best opponent against Bush.

I also think that Kerry was a stealth progressive, and could potentially have been a great liberal president.

I also think that the right wing was scared of Kerry in the same way they're scared of Clinton. They started their smear machine early with Kerry (including trolls on DU) and I think they're going to do it with Clinton, if they haven't already started.

[CWebster]

109. I only got one thing to say

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2002/10/21/tomo/index.html

[Ms_Mary]

110. Hillary would lose by a landslide.

[scbluevoter]

111. UH, SORRY BUT AL GORE IS COMING BACK. . .

TO REDRESS THE WRONG OF 2000. BANK ON IT!

[merh]

112. I will welcome him with open arms!

No clintons - they are dinos that are as misguided about their destiny to control our nation as are the weed's family!

[lojasmo]

116. I ceratainly hope so! NO HILLARY CLINTON!

Al gore is STILL my president.

[TOOLZ]

113. For once, there's actually real dirt on this candidate

not some trumped up "yeah you went to Nam and got wounded, but one of those three times I don't think you were wounded ENOUGH, and even though it was a wrong war with no point who are you to come back from it and ask kids to stop dying??"

Hillary's done real shady shit. There's bodies in places she knows about. Vince Foster will be everywhere suddenly once she gets momentum.

We can't fall back on her just because we're used to looking at her. HOW ABOUT SOMEONE NEW GUYS???

[Untouchedalarm]

117. Never again

The media will not influence my vote anymore. They have already chosen Hillary for us.

[DemDogs]

118. Uncalled for

I completely agree that she cannot win. Among Democrats she gets a third to forty percent of the early interest, much of which may be women wondering if we will ever have the guts to nominate a woman. Among independents and Republicans, she is the most despised Democrat. She didn't campaign in Florida or New Mexico, states someone said they thought she could add to blue states. If Kerry thought she could have helped there or anywhere she would have been out there.
BUT Vince Foster? "Shady shit?" You talk like the RW view of this has credence. Parts of this post could have been word for word from FR. I think we should watch it.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

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

[tsuki]

122. Disagree. Hillary will not win the nomination.

[KissMeKate]

123. this makes me wonder - why do republicans keep pushing Hillary?

Its all over the media, she has zero grassroots support- why Hillary being pushed as an 08 candidate?

[accipiter]

124. She has quite a bit of grassroots support

Remember her book tour? Now imagine a presidential run.

The pubs are scared of her. Don't fall for their lame pathetic bluffs.

[KissMeKate]

125. haha- *their* bluffs

ok.

Anyways. Why do republicans keep promoting Hillary?

The astroturf campaign will fail. She is hated by too many democrats.

[KissMeKate]

126. a book tour is NOT political support.

she has zero grassroots support.

[Scatamooch]

127. What, Are You A Closet Republican?

What Is It Going To Take To Get Through To The Democratic Party? Do you think the pubs will all of the sudden start to play fair??? Look what they did in the last two elections...They stole the 2000 election...Then in 2004, told the American people that our candidate was a traitor to his country! Not to mention the voter fraud that again took place. The far right agenda is on the move, and I don't see them giving it up without another dirty fight.

We need somebody who doesn't have a past...Whitewater alone will become the basis for showing Hillary to be a dishonest and deceitful candidate...Let's actually dig into our candidates past before the pubs do! By the time the 2004 election was through, that one picture hanging in a museum in Cambodia of John Kerry, thanking him for helping to end the war, really didn't help our cause. Most Vietnam Vets blame Kerry for the war lasting longer and ultimately adding to the over 58,000 troops killed.

Besides, Can You Imagine Slick Willie As First Lady???

Scatamooch:bounce:

[TexasLawyer]

128. Nothing that the Dems want is actually going to happen

unless this country's election fraud problems get fixed. With unverifiable election results and elections run by partisan hacks, Dems will be screwed over YET AGAIN.

[bettyellen]

129. All of your arguments about why Hillary would win, would be

pretty much the same if you substituted the name of any viable Dem candidate. You say nothing about why your senario is particular to Clinton as opposed to others. The woman's been involved in politics forever, yet: " Excitement .... controversial ....sparking imaginations" is all that you manage to tell us about her?
If her other "supporters" argue as lamely as you do, she'd be lucky to be elected dogcatcher.

[liberal43110]

132. Accipiter, i don't think you are a Democrat

Your comments today have all been quite suspicious.


Bye! :hi: