You know, I'm almost tempted to jump on the Hillary '08 Bandwagon

[LynneSin]

You know me (or for those who don't), I've always felt that in the long run Hillary would choose not to run because she probably has more power as a US Senator and she knows the headache & inefficiency that goes with being the president. I sometimes think that the whole Hillary '08 (along with her so-called '04 campaign) is a distraction ploy by the democratic party in order to work on their real candidates will the fundies and right-wing nut job (is there a difference) go crazy trying to defeat a non-existant candidate.

But you know, I almost am tempted to jump on the bandwagon - Run Hillary RUN! And you know why? Pure of the absolutely pure satisfaction of seeing her win and watching fundies & right-wing nut jobs collective heads explode with a Hillary Clinton Presidency

[deacon]

1. Not me, she has to call bush Alfred for a few years yet on a regular basis

--no half stepping.

Then maybe.

[Wetzelbill]

5. I called him Alfred E, Neuman 5 years ago, it cracked my dad up

but I haven't used it much over the years. I'm partial to The Chimp myself.

[lvx35]

2. Yeah, they would HATE it.

Those on this forum who have a mind to piss off the republicans absolutly should support her. Nothing would do it like her! :)

[wyldwolf]

3. Who else is on this bandwagon?

I don't know anyone personally - we're all gearing for '06.

On DU, I've only seen few people who are seriouly promoting her as a candidate. In fact, "few" may be an understatement.

Only ones I know pushing this is the rightwing.

But your reasoning is good. Can I get a seat on the 50 yard line if Hillary runs, wins, and those freeper heads start exploding?

[Mist]

6. Call me crazy, but I'm not supporting a candidate who's being touted

by rw's and the corporate media.

[Clark2008]

8. That's my saying: if the media thinks it's a good idea for the Dems -

it's not.

[LynneSin]

12. I'll work hard for 06 and save you a seat next to me in 08 on the 50

m'kay

Actually, the whole just of my post was sarcastic. Hell, we have many important elections even in 2005 that we need to focus on too like VA/NJ governor seats and plenty of state congresses.

[Wetzelbill]

4. Sometimes she almost convinces me to jump on too....

Rush, Hannity and Brit Hume's heads:

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[bowens43]

7. I think she would lose and the Fundies

would see it as more evidence that Murikans want a theocracy.

But yes, it would be sweet to watch the freepers melt after a Hillary victory..

[OffWithTheirHeads]

9. Then you will enjoy this

http://www.michaelhodges.com/stuff/funny/2008cc1.swf
Wish I could take credit but I got this off a link posted by a DUer more observant than me, a few days ago.

Should make you smile this A.M..

[quaway]

10. but if not her...

then who else ?

[OffWithTheirHeads]

11. Hey, I,m open to her.

But you know the candidate will end up being some boring empty DLC slut.

Too dangerous to send a real fighter in, might end up getting elected.

[LynneSin]

16. I think with Dean that may not happen

But I hate to say it, better a DLC slut than another 4-8 years of an extension of the Bush administration (aka Frist, Santorum, Jeb, etc)

[OffWithTheirHeads]

27. Well Lynn, we are definitely on different sides of the fence

I say, take it to em and take it to em hard. We don't need Lieberman, Fienstein, Miller, Vichy Dem's to lead the charge. They charge in lockstep with the Nazi pukes. Collaboration in the face of tyranny is not an option, IMHO.

[LynneSin]

13. There are so many great choices out there

Tops on my list are 3 governors - Rendell of PA, Warner of Virginia and Richardson of New Mexico.

Making Hillary as our only hope in 08 means that maybe we should find another passion other than politics. We can win in 2008 and we don't need Hillary to do it. My only concern is if we have another democratic senator running since senators seem to have absolutely no luck whatsoever and I especially do NOT want Gore or Kerry as my candidate. We need someone who is charismatic that appeals to all sorts of folks and we need a governor because let's face it, it's hard to pin made up shit on them like it is with senators where we can take some massive bill and find some itty bitty line in it and use it to demerit the candidate.

[Kahuna]

15. My pecking order right now is, Clark, Warner, Hillary....then

the other guys who will likely run like Biden, Bayh, Kerry and Edwards would only get my support if they are the nominees. But they won't be so I won't have to worry about them.

[election_2004]

25. Here's who....

U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln in '08!!!!

http://www.lincoln2008.com

[Kahuna]

14. Run fior your life, LynneSin!! Runnn! I said Run, Hillary Run..

a couple of weeks ago and whoo boy! I personally don't see were she is any worse than the other candidates we have been fielding. I say, run Hillary and may the best candidate win.

[tanyev]

17. Heck, they're so sure she's running, their heads will explode

if she announces she's NOT running for president. I would love to see her keep quiet about it right up until the filing deadline so they waste lots and lots of money on her and then they all look like (even bigger) idiots when she doesn't file.

[Rambis]

18. I can't decide if they just hate her or are scared to death of her

still don't know?:shrug:

[noonwitch]

19. Fear and anger/hatred are flip sides of the same emotion

People get angry because they don't like being afraid.

[A Simple Game]

20. It's both.

Most people don't like to be proved wrong, but to be proved wrong by your worst enemy?

It doesn't matter that that enemy is of your own making.

[AlGore-08.com]

23. They're not scared of her - - she is possibly the worst candidate we could

have in 2008.

Look at the polls - - people don't see what's going wrong with America as the fault of the Republicans. They see it as the fault of whoever is in office - - Dem as well as Republican. Congress consistently gets a lower approval rating than even Smirk!

What are her positives? Name recognition, the Clinton fund raising machine and that's it. Hillary Clinton has no record. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Name one major thing she has accomplished as a Senator. Zero. Nada. Zilch. And her voting record hamstrings her in the same way that Kerry's voting record hamstrung him in 2004 - - she voted for the war, she voted for the patriot act, etc., etc., etc. As First Lady her one major foray into legislative politics - - health care - - was a disaster that set the cause back 20 years.

What are her negatives? She's the second most hated Democrat, married to the first most hated Democrat. Then again, there's her record, or more accurately, her total lack of record.

What kind of campaign could she possibly run? All she can do is make promises of what she would do in office - - everybody will have to take it on faith that she can deliver those promises, since she has no record that she can point to and say "I did x, so you know I can do y." And given her voting record, she can't plausibly run as "Everything is f*ed up, we need a fresh start". All she can do is the same thing Kerry did: say "Everything's basically okay but I can tweak it a little and it'll be way better."

What republican could she possibly beat? Any Republican who has been outside of Washington (a Governor or a mayor even) can run as an outsider the way she can't. And any Republican who has spent more than one term in office can best her legislative record. The one Republican Senator who has a good shot at winning the nomination is John McCain, and his entire persona is of the straight talking outsider who stood up against the Bush Administration. He literally has decades worth of acheivements he can point to, many of them moderate and liberal friendly. As I posted in another part of the thread, Zogby's latest poll has McCain mopping the floor with HRC -- 54% to 35%.

I lived through the Mondale and Dukakis defeats. I have no desire to live through the HRC defeat, which will be equally historic.

[ArkDem]

21. At some point you WILL jump on the bandwagon.

[AlGore-08.com]

22. Except that she'd lose the general election in a landslide

Let's get real here, folks:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1005

McCain Would Trounce Hillary in ’08 Match-up, 54%-35%; Bush Job Approval Plummets to 44%—Iraq Handling at 39%; Kerry, Bush Would Tie if Election Held Again; Just One-in-Four Approve of Congress’ Job Performance, New Zogby Poll Reveals

Arizona Senator John McCain would overwhelmingly defeat New York Senator and former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton in a theoretical 2008 presidential match-up, a new Zogby America poll reveals.

The survey also shows that in a re-match of the 2004 election, Americans would now vote in equal numbers for Democrat John Kerry and President George W. Bush, while President Bush’s approval rating has plummeted to 44%—the lowest numbers of his presidency. The poll also found fewer than two-in-five (39%) voters approve of President Bush’s handling of the Iraq war.

The Zogby America survey of 1000 likely voters, conducted from June 20 through 22, 2005, has a margin of error of +/-3.2 percentage points.

The same survey finds Congress’ job rating even lower, with just one-in-four likely voters (26%) rating the legislature favorably—and just 2% saying it is doing an excellent job.

The survey finds that both senators far outdistance their nearest competition for their parties’ nominations—but in a head-to-head match-up, the Arizona Republican bests the New York Democrat by 19 points, leading her 54% to 35%. McCain would also defeat Massachusetts Senator—and former Democratic presidential candidate—John Kerry by a full 20 points, 55% to 35%.

McCain has majority support in every single geographic region of the country. But more telling may be the fact that, even in the states carried by Kerry in 2004, McCain comes out comfortably on top—leading Clinton by 49 to 38% and Kerry by 50% to 40%. Among the states carried by President Bush, the margin is even wider, giving McCain a 58% to 33% lead over Clinton and 59% to 32% lead over Kerry.

McCain leads with most demographics, though Clinton would best him narrowly among Hispanic voters (45% to 38%) and would win African Americans by 80% to 19%. But that 19% would be the highest vote tally for a Republican with African Americans in decades. McCain leads Clinton with every age group except voters under 30, where the two are in a dead heat.

[FrenchieCat]

24. Getting our country back is not about Entertainment or seeking

satisfaction....winning our country back is serious business, kind of like a heart attack.

This is war, not an experiment.

We cannot afford the "gamble" in oder to pssibly experience pure satisfaction.....because that may not end up being what we will experience.

An election with Hillary running, will be an election about Hillary, and not about Democratic issues. Too me, that is nothing to look forward to.

[election_2004]

26. Why is everyone forgetting....?

Regardless of whether Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton would end up winning the General Election or not (and I think she probably would win)....either way, putting her at the top of the Democratic ticket would lead to heavy downticket losses for Democratic candidates in redder, more conservative states. How does that support a "50-state strategy"???

You want to lose Tim Johnson's, Mark Pryor's, and Mary Landrieu's U.S. Senate seats in '08? (along with a handful of Democrats in the U.S. House) - - then by all means, PUSH FOR HILLARY TO BE THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE!!!

And don't even get me started on what a disaster the 2010 midterms would be!!!

[wyldwolf]

28. wow! That is fascinating...

Will you elaborate more on this?