Here's your problem: it's 2008, the Hillary and a 'thug are up...

[Rosco T.]

Dosen't matter who the 'thug is.

There is more than a little anti-Hillary feelings around.

Which is more important.

Stopping ShrubCo's heir apparant, or not supporting Hillary?

[mermaid]

1. OBVIOUSLY.....

we'd vote Hillary over any Pug. But, damn...the Pugs would be lining up to vote against Hillary, and it scares the crap outta me...I hope like HELL Hillary doesn't end up the nominee...I'm too scared of the power she has to draw out our opposition.

[Dookus]

2. Why do Republicans never concern themselves with that?

They run the most divisive, polarizing people and they win. We have to stop being afraid, and we definitely have to stop letting the other side pick our nominees.

Hillary is no more divisive than Bush, and I'd argue she's much less-so.

[alittlelark]

3. OK..... aside from the fact that she is the victim of a $$$$ MSM

SMEAR CAMPAIGN???? Yeah. Until she walks on water to save the pope from the grim reaper who is actually Osama, on camera, and it is broadcast around the world, she has no chance....and you KNOW IT.....

She was gutted before she even stepped into the ring. Sad, embarrassing, and a derivative of our misogynistic corporatist system.

[realisticphish]

5. actually

saving the pope will lose a lot of fundies :shrug:

:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

[alittlelark]

7. It's the CONCEPT.... and it may actually CONVERT many fundies!

... to what I do not know.

[Dookus]

9. I know no such thing

They said she couldn't win a senate seat and she did. She's very popular among Democrats nationwide. I think it's ridiculous to say she can't win.

But you didn't answer my question - why do Republicans keep winning when they show NO concern about not running divisive or controversial candidates?

[alittlelark]

10. My answer - Uhhhh,.... Diebold? Uh, MSM covering it ????

WE, The American People, are not STUPID enough to VOTE these people in.


But we are, sadly, stoooopid enough to believe in a free press:silly:

I sincerely hope that will STOP soon.

[alittlelark]

12. You sleep at such convenient times.

[Dookus]

13. huh?

what do you mean?

[alittlelark]

14. Damn, you woke up!

[Dookus]

15. I really don't know what you're talking about

I haven't gone to bed. Are you disappointed that I wasn't monitoring this thread minute-by-minute to respond? If so, sorry.

Now....

how is it that the Republicans run the most divisive controversial candidates without giving a flying fuck about whether Democrats find the candidate offensive, and yet manage to win?

They don't take our wishes into consideration when choosing their candidates. Why should we do them the favor?

[alittlelark]

17. OK, and you want to run Hillary....

grasp some reality please. We have neither the MSM nor the Corporate $$$$.



HELLO?

[Dookus]

19. HELLO?

why not answer the question I asked three times?

[alittlelark]

20. OK, I looked.... find a ? asked 3 times and I will answer it

as long as it is not a RW casual 'talking point'. Why are 'some of us' soooo divisive, and seeking problems? Why do 'some of us 'seek out the prime points of division' and then dive in????

....sigh.

[Dookus]

21. ok

clearly you have no desire to engage in discussion on this issue. Good night.

[alittlelark]

22. Just like all the other times????

G' night.

[Enquiringkitty]

24. The Reps win because no matter what idiot they run, they tap into what

ever emotional fear based issue will be most effective such as "The terrorist will come to get you if any other man is in the White House" or "Bush is the only one who can save social security", then they exaggerate the facts and figures so that when we try to answer them they can say we are flip-flopping and trying to explain away why we didn't fix it the last time we had the White House.

[Dookus]

26. yes, they do that

and we need to counteract it better.

Bill Clinton did, and did so very well. I think Hillary will have some of the same advantages.

Also, consider that Condi Rice has a shot at being the Republican candidate. What would happen in a Condi/Hillary matchup? The "no women in the White House" issue goes away.

[Clark2008]

34. It's easy to run polarizing candidates when you have the media's help

to bring in the moderates.

And, as someone who lives in a red state, I can say for 99 percent certain that she can't win a general election. Believe me, I'm down here with the rabble. I know what will happen.

[dameocrat]

8. Not just the republicans the dlc moderates like Chait

and and Tim Matthews will go after her.

[alittlelark]

16. Uh.

[saltpoint]

4. I think in this scenario it does matter which thug.

If you mean Hillary vs. THE CAT BUTCHER, or Jeb, or Romney, Allen, Owen, Giuliani, Gingrich, Pataki, or someone even worse, I'd vote Green or Socialist.

If you mean Hillary Clinton vs. Olympia Snowe, I vote Snowe. I'd prefer as liberal a president as possible, and Hillary Clinton is already angling further and further to the right as she strives for "electability." Snowe or someone like Lowell Weicker would be to the left of Sen. Clinton and I'd probably take either of them over her now, let alone in 2008 when Hillary is likely to be even more conservative.

Or I'd consider a write-in vote for President Gore or President Kerry, or Feingold, Edwards, Boxer, etc.

[alittlelark]

11. I'd take Hillary over any of those (R) Corporatists

But I would PREFER DEAN, Clark, Feingold.......

[saltpoint]

33. Hillary Clinton could surprise me, true.

I'm going to vote somewhere or other on the independent/Green/Socialist/liberal Democratic spectrum.

If she moves too far to the right, I can't vote for her.

Barbara Boxer would make a great president and I hope the first female president is Boxer. But don't ask me how she's going to win the South Carolina primary.

[More Than A Feeling]

6. My vote in '08 is for the Democrat.

I will hold my nose if I must.

[orleans]

18. if hillary is the nominee and there is any type of terror "threat"

and of course there will be (if bushco has to manufacture one!) or any hint of involvement in the corporate business of war (which i'm sure there will be) i don't see how a woman could be elected as president.

americans aren't open-minded enough to vote in a woman to "protect" them (and i don't need the argument about how mr. shit-for-brains didn't do a thing to save us--i'm well aware of it). i just can't imagine people voting in a female under the circumstances that will definitely be present--no matter what jeb has to do to make them present!

and hence, if she is the nominee, the repukes will retain the power!

i can't tell you how much i hope that doesn't happen. (in my fantasyland we win seats in 2006 and the p*ick is impeached! and run out of dodge on a rail!)

[Dave Sund]

23. Self-Fulfilling Prophecies

1) She can't win.
2) I'm not going to vote for someone who can't win.
3) Therefore, she won't win.

I don't understand this logic at all. I can't STAND this logic. I don't want Hillary to get the nomination. But anyone who dares suggest that if she got the nomination, that they would vote for a Green or Socialist...

I have to ask: why?

Clinton's not that bad. She's certainly better than anyone the Repugs are going to throw at us. And there could be some very real demographic advantages to having Clinton as the nominee. (Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of the very real demographic disadvantages, as well. Just hear me out.) You don't think Hillary would drive up our numbers among women? Do you see the fundies lining up to vote for Bill Frist? They certainly aren't going to do it for Rudy. Or McCain.

I think you severely underestimate where this country is going to be in 2008. There is no telling who can and cannot win until we reach that point. The 2006 elections could go extremely well for us. Then what?

It is absolutely imperative that we not allow the White House to stay in control of the Republican Party. I totally understand your reservations about Hillary. I share them. But if she's the nominee, be prepared to stand behind her, or live with the consequences.

[lonestarnot]

30. She would make a wonderful President! Expert consultation! She has

American interests at heart.

[d_b]

25. She wont be my first pick.

but I'll vote for her if it comes down to Clinton vs Satantorum - or whichever Nazi-fuck they throw at her.

I wouldn't mind a Clark/Clinton ticket. Or a Kerry/Clinton.

[JerseygirlCT]

27. I'll admit it: I'd have no problem supporting Hillary.

[Bridget Burke]

28. I'd support Hillary.

I do tend to vote Democratic.

[HughBeaumont]

29. ONLY in that scenario would I vote for her.

Of course, it would all be moot since she wouldn't turn A SINGLE CURRENT RED STATE, ONCE AGAIN!!! Geeez, how many times do we have to be told?

[Padraig18]

31. I'd work my ass off to get her elected, of course.

I'm a yellow-dog Democrat, and I can't conceive of a Republican nominee being preferable to Hillary, frankly. That said, I wouldn't be exactly THRILLED that she was our nominee.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. That would make it easy to be Green.

And, let the two wings of the Republican Party fight it out.